Agile Automotive, I got screwed
Feb 6, 2015, 05:45 AM
#1
Agile Automotive, I got screwed
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/pr...l#post11384972
here's the Agile Automotive built 2.3 stoker that didn't even last one event, less than 1k street miles. after the motor was built by Agile, i installed it and put about 300 street miles on a base map before getting it dyno tuned. I didn't have them tune it because i already had a sponsor tuner. I have wideband in my car and was monitoring and logging the whole time. The car got tuned on the dyno, made really good power on the dyno. we did notice that after about a dozen dyno pull, the catch can was full. i thought it as odd but just thought that maybe i forgot to drain it before i installed the motor. after the dyno tune, i still took it easy on the car and got about 1k miles on it before i did my first TT event. on my first session out at the first event, my dip stick blew out and got oil all over the engine bay (This didn't happen on my stock motor with same power level and crank vent setup, 320whp mustang dyno). so i came in and zip tied the dip stick down. went out for the second session and the oil catch can over flow after a few laps. i knew there was a bad blow by issue. i did about 15 laps over the whole event weekend. after the event. i went home and did compression and leak down test and numbers came out good. I called Agile and they told me to bring the car down for them to check. they did compression test and leak down test and bore scope. Charged me $100 just to confirm my numbers and told me it was inconclusive and to do the next event and see if anything change. I did the next TT two weeks later and same thing happens. The catch can would over flow after just two hot laps. I contact Agile again and told them what happened. They said the warranty was void because they didn't install the motor or tuned it. But they did blame the tune for massive blow by. i asked them for build specs and they wouldn't give it to me. the only thing they told me was the piston clearance was tight. So my sponsor MPG told me to take the car to CBRD and they'll take care of it. CBRD took the motor out and i was going to have them take it apart. but Agile told me that they have to take it apart or the warranty would be void (they told me it was void already before). so i drop the motor off and stood there while they take it apart. from initial assessment, they told me it looked like cylinder wall glazing, but they would have to send it to machine shop to confirm. they blamed it on the tune. my tuner Petey Turbo has tuned countless evo's in the northeast region. after a couple weeks went by, i contact Agile and asked what the status was. they told me that the machine shop confirmed that the cylinder wall were glazed and told me what it would cost to rebuild. i didn't trust them to rebuild it, so i told them i would come pick up the motor. when i got there to pick up the motor, they charged me $200 for looking at it. i was like wtf, they told me that no one else could look at or they would void warranty but then charge me $200 after denying warranty. i had to pay or i couldn't take the engine home. when i got home and looked at the block, it was already rehoned, like they were trying to get rid of the evidence, even though i told them i didn't want the block rebuilt.
the whole time they were blaming on the tune. i sent them my base map and all the datalogs. even sent them contact information of my tuner as they requested. they never looked at the maps or the logs.
you can see the wear on the piston skirt coating. it's completely gone with only 1k miles. my stock motor with 40k miles and 4 years of track has more piston coating than that. and the wear on the side of the cylinder looked worse then my stock motor with 40k miles. i know 2.3 put more side load on pistons but that seems way excessive for 1k miles. my guess is the tight piston to wall clearance had something to do with the blow by. unfortunate, they already rehoned the block when i got it back, so i couldn't measure piston to wall clearance or ring gap.
i find out later from other shops in the area that Agile does shady work and a lot of there clients have to go to other shops to fix their work. looks like i'm one of them.
this is how much oil that came out the catch can after just two laps at Summit Point (2 miles per lap)
here's the Agile Automotive built 2.3 stoker that didn't even last one event, less than 1k street miles. after the motor was built by Agile, i installed it and put about 300 street miles on a base map before getting it dyno tuned. I didn't have them tune it because i already had a sponsor tuner. I have wideband in my car and was monitoring and logging the whole time. The car got tuned on the dyno, made really good power on the dyno. we did notice that after about a dozen dyno pull, the catch can was full. i thought it as odd but just thought that maybe i forgot to drain it before i installed the motor. after the dyno tune, i still took it easy on the car and got about 1k miles on it before i did my first TT event. on my first session out at the first event, my dip stick blew out and got oil all over the engine bay (This didn't happen on my stock motor with same power level and crank vent setup, 320whp mustang dyno). so i came in and zip tied the dip stick down. went out for the second session and the oil catch can over flow after a few laps. i knew there was a bad blow by issue. i did about 15 laps over the whole event weekend. after the event. i went home and did compression and leak down test and numbers came out good. I called Agile and they told me to bring the car down for them to check. they did compression test and leak down test and bore scope. Charged me $100 just to confirm my numbers and told me it was inconclusive and to do the next event and see if anything change. I did the next TT two weeks later and same thing happens. The catch can would over flow after just two hot laps. I contact Agile again and told them what happened. They said the warranty was void because they didn't install the motor or tuned it. But they did blame the tune for massive blow by. i asked them for build specs and they wouldn't give it to me. the only thing they told me was the piston clearance was tight. So my sponsor MPG told me to take the car to CBRD and they'll take care of it. CBRD took the motor out and i was going to have them take it apart. but Agile told me that they have to take it apart or the warranty would be void (they told me it was void already before). so i drop the motor off and stood there while they take it apart. from initial assessment, they told me it looked like cylinder wall glazing, but they would have to send it to machine shop to confirm. they blamed it on the tune. my tuner Petey Turbo has tuned countless evo's in the northeast region. after a couple weeks went by, i contact Agile and asked what the status was. they told me that the machine shop confirmed that the cylinder wall were glazed and told me what it would cost to rebuild. i didn't trust them to rebuild it, so i told them i would come pick up the motor. when i got there to pick up the motor, they charged me $200 for looking at it. i was like wtf, they told me that no one else could look at or they would void warranty but then charge me $200 after denying warranty. i had to pay or i couldn't take the engine home. when i got home and looked at the block, it was already rehoned, like they were trying to get rid of the evidence, even though i told them i didn't want the block rebuilt.
the whole time they were blaming on the tune. i sent them my base map and all the datalogs. even sent them contact information of my tuner as they requested. they never looked at the maps or the logs.
you can see the wear on the piston skirt coating. it's completely gone with only 1k miles. my stock motor with 40k miles and 4 years of track has more piston coating than that. and the wear on the side of the cylinder looked worse then my stock motor with 40k miles. i know 2.3 put more side load on pistons but that seems way excessive for 1k miles. my guess is the tight piston to wall clearance had something to do with the blow by. unfortunate, they already rehoned the block when i got it back, so i couldn't measure piston to wall clearance or ring gap.
i find out later from other shops in the area that Agile does shady work and a lot of there clients have to go to other shops to fix their work. looks like i'm one of them.
this is how much oil that came out the catch can after just two laps at Summit Point (2 miles per lap)
Feb 10, 2015, 06:49 AM
#2
Evolving Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm left scratching my head a bit since based on your info you're located in Central, PA and CBRD is probably closer to begin with. Anyway, glad you are in good hands now! Sorry for your poor experience.
Feb 10, 2015, 09:24 AM
#4
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (1)
Wow, that is a lot of wear. Especially since they already ran the hone through it and its still very visible. I'm going to guess leak down and compression came out okay because the rings were probably still sealing towards the top. I wonder if the cylinder is out of round in the middle..
Feb 10, 2015, 11:12 AM
#5
that was one of their proposed solution. rehone the block to take out some clearance(since i think piston to wall was too tight) and put new rings on. i'd still have to pay for the whole rebuild, which i wasn't about to if they screwed it up the first time.
Feb 10, 2015, 11:17 AM
#7
Wow, that is a lot of wear. Especially since they already ran the hone through it and its still very visible. I'm going to guess leak down and compression came out okay because the rings were probably still sealing towards the top. I wonder if the cylinder is out of round in the middle..
i think it would have been fine to get the pistons skirt recoated. hone the cylinder and check for piston to wall clearance and put now rings on and it would be good to go. but cbrd was in the process of building a new 2.2 for me, so i didn't want to bother with it.
Trending Topics
Feb 10, 2015, 11:23 AM
#8
but looking at the wear on the piston side skirts with low miles. i conclude it PTW was too tight. the motor was also dead quiet on cold start. i've never heard a built motor that quiet on cold start, no cold piston knock at all.
they also slap the papers that i signed saying all warranty is voided if they didn't tune the car. but then why tell me to bring the motor there to tare apart and charge me more for the labor if its already voided in the first place.
Last edited by honda-guy; Feb 10, 2015 at 11:25 AM.
Feb 10, 2015, 02:12 PM
#11
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: West Chester Pa.
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CBRD really stepped up to help save the 2014 TT season for the RS!!. With more support from CBRD this season and that awesome motor running strong, the 2015 TT series will be very exciting.
Feb 11, 2015, 07:09 AM
#12
Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The cause of the blow-by and the subsequent denial of warranty was due to cylinder wall glazing as this individual has stated. Glazing is the common term used to describe the condition where oxidized oil is cooked onto the cylinder walls. The oxidized oil creates a layer of varnish that will effectively fill in the low-lying regions of the cylinders’ hone, making the bores smooth. Since glazing prevents the rings from directly contacting the rougher texture of the hone on the bores it will prevent the normal ring wear that gives proper ring seal during break in. Glazing presents itself as a shiny golden or yellowy hue on the cylinder walls. This glazing was apparent on Thai’s engine which we noted and discussed with him while he watched us take the engine apart. Our machine shop further confirmed the condition. Since we rarely see this condition because we use a fairly aggressive hone grit we wanted to be certain that this was a correct diagnosis.
There are numerous potential causes of glazing and there’s a lot of technical information out there on the subject. Some causes of glazing can be using synthetic oil or oils with high quantities of friction modifiers during break-in, the car running too rich during initial start-up and/or during break-in driving, holding the engine at a steady low-load RPM for long periods, and high boost causing the cylinders that are not in the combustion stroke to be coated by oil caused by build-up of positive crankcase pressure because the rings have not yet seated.
In this case we believe the damage was caused by gross over-fueling (excessively rich mixture) during the initial and subsequent start-ups. By Thai’s own admission and confirmed when Thai brought his car in for the compression test, we found that when started cold, you would have to hold the accelerator pedal down to keep the RPM elevated substantially to keep the car from stalling out. During this time when the car wouldn’t hold an idle without stalling it smelled strongly of raw, unburned fuel. Since we hadn’t performed the tuning I was not overly concerned about the actual measured air fuel ratio at the time. That has proven to be an error in my judgment as this is the smoking gun in this case. Unfortunately, this was after engine break-in, after tuning, and after a track event on the car so in this case the damage was already done and irreversible (without re-honing).
When I looked for other companies who offer similar services as we do, I found a few references to this kind of scenario.
From Cosworth, a leading supplier of engines to professional motorsports teams:
Engine Break-in
“It is critical that your Cosworth engine is not started with an excessively rich fuel mixture. An excessively rich mixture will wash away the oil in the cylinders and the rings can potentially never break-in causing excessive oil consumption, crankcase blow-by and lower power output. This damage is permanent.”
From AMS who you may be more familiar with:
“*Make sure the car is tuned to a safe air/fuel ratio before any wide open throttle driving is done. Running a car too rich during break-in can wash down cylinder walls not allowing the piston rings to seat correctly.”
Since this engine left Agile in the back of a CRV and not installed in Thai’s Evo, never having been run, we were not allowed to tune the engine, and the car nor engine ever came back to Agile until after the first track day, it was quite obvious to us that the glazing occurred due to circumstances outside of our control and was not of our creation.
In spite of Agile not being responsible for the glazing, we offered to fix the engine for a total of $270 plus cost of machine work (hone and clean). This is miles below what we would normally charge. We also asked that Thai supply the replacement rings and we recommended that he also replace the bearings (we prefer never to reuse). He had supplied all the parts up to this time since he has his own dealer accounts. This was done in good faith because we wanted Thai out there racing as badly as he wanted to be out there racing.
We heard nothing from the customer for several weeks after offering to fix the engine at a greatly discounted price. My machine shop wanted the block gone and I didn’t want to bring it back to them whenever it was decided to invest in making it operational again so, in error, I asked the machine shop to go ahead and hone it so it would be ready for reassembly. In retrospect this was a huge mistake as the customer believes that the piston to wall clearance was the cause of the problem.
One thing worth noting, however, is that all the ring gaps, piston to wall clearances and bore measurements were recorded during assembly on our build sheet and confirmed in front of the customer while he watched us take apart the engine. It is true that we typically don’t publish or share our build tolerances with the end user of our engines. This has always been our policy and is nothing new. When the customer came to see the engine disassembled we offered to show him the build sheet and told him the only thing he could not do was take a photo of it but that we would gladly verify any measurement on the sheet against the engine we were disassembling. We allowed him to oversee the entire disassembly of the long block. We had nothing to hide and the upmost faith in our assembly, but we certainly did want to be sure that we had not caused the blow by problem.
The assertion that the piston to wall clearance was too tight is incorrect in this case. To the experienced eye, that will be clear from looking at the pictures that the customer posted in his complaint above. When the piston to wall is set too tight and the pistons expands as heat is transferred into the forgings from the combustion process, they will expand to the point where the clearance between the skirt and the wall is no longer sufficient for oil to lubricate the skirt and prevent metal on metal contact. This breakdown in lubrication will cause substantially more scoring than is evident on this customer’s pistons or bores because there quite literally is no lubrication at all.
“Why is there some scoring and minor skirt wear?” is the obvious next question. This kind of wear is often found in engines that are operated on excessively rich fuel mixtures. As the cylinder is overloaded with fuel that cannot be burned in the combustion process, the excess fuel lines the bores, impairing ring seal (commonly referred to as fuel wash) and runs down below the rings. Once the fuel makes its way past the rings it will break down the normal coating of oil on the bores that lubricates and protects the skirts from scuffing. As I’m sure you’re all aware, gasoline is not a good lubricant, and oil with high concentrations of gasoline in it will lose viscosity and break down. This mode of wear is not the total lack of or near total lack of lubrication that would be found in an overly tight piston to wall scenario, but it will cause the oil to lose film strength and viscosity, resulting in greatly accelerated wear as evidenced by the abraded skit coatings and scuffed points low in the bores. The reason for the scuffing only occurring low in the bore is that this is where high rod angles will push the piston into the wall in the absence of proper oil film strength. If this were an overly tight piston to wall clearance you would find scoring from the lowest point of piston travel in the bore to the upper point in the bore where the skirt tops out at top dead center. The scoring will follow the travel of the skirt because it is the widest portion of the piston.
Enough technobabble.
I certainly understand this customers frustrations. No one wants to have to build a motor twice, including us, especially when we have heavily discounted the initial build and offered heavy discounts on the reassembly after the glazing. We had fully exhausted our annual sponsorship budget before we took on this customer’s first race engine build but we saw promise in his driving and wanted to be a part of his race program. If the circumstances were different we may have covered the rebuild as a further sponsorship, but our other customers who were at the track for the same event reported back to us that the customer immediately and publicly began finger pointing and portraying us negatively. This is absolutely the fastest, worst way to terminate a sponsorship. Regardless of the finger pointing, we would have taken responsibility and make things right if the problem was of our creation.
There is one inaccuracy with the account of events above that I would like to contest. The complaint mentions that the warranty was canceled or declined before the engine was disassembled. This is not the case. I warned the customer that there was no further sponsorship available and that if we took the engine apart and were not responsible for the failure, that he would be charged for the reassembly. I didn’t outright decline warranty coverage until the head machinist at our machine shop confirmed our findings following the disassembly. I wanted to be certain that the customer understood that there was a possibility that he would be charged. During the initial conversation about the denial of warranty with the customer there was no arguing or even questioning of our diagnosis. The customer’s frustrations didn’t become apparent until he came to pick up his disassembled engine after declining the reassembly. At this time, he became combative to the point that my staff thought there would be an altercation in spite of their efforts to calm him down and explain our findings and position. Word later came down to me that he had made physical threats to my staff and that if my wife and child had not been present that he would have assaulted my service writer, who had nothing to do with the situation and was simply the bearer of bad news.
We cut off all ties with the customer, believing that no amount of evidence or explaining was going to change his predetermined conclusion that we were at fault and that he should not have to pay for services performed. The unfortunate side of this industry is that some think that a certain amount of complaining and threats of public humiliation will change the facts and/or financial burdens of repair. We have to draw a line in the sand and stick to the side of what is just for all parties involved. Has this been a constructive use of my time to fight over a $270 rebuild? No, obviously this is not a good use of my time and I have a lot more than the 3 hours we would have billed to rebuild it in dealing with the denial of warranty and subsequent blowback. However, we cannot sit back and allow ourselves and our business to be taken advantage of simply because of very vocal complaining, with no signs of wrongdoing on our part.
In spite of the events that have transpired, I have no ill will towards this customer and I hope that his experiences with other shops serve him better.
If anyone would like further information on our findings with regard to the customer’s engine please feel free to contact me.
-Hill
Agile Auto
There are numerous potential causes of glazing and there’s a lot of technical information out there on the subject. Some causes of glazing can be using synthetic oil or oils with high quantities of friction modifiers during break-in, the car running too rich during initial start-up and/or during break-in driving, holding the engine at a steady low-load RPM for long periods, and high boost causing the cylinders that are not in the combustion stroke to be coated by oil caused by build-up of positive crankcase pressure because the rings have not yet seated.
In this case we believe the damage was caused by gross over-fueling (excessively rich mixture) during the initial and subsequent start-ups. By Thai’s own admission and confirmed when Thai brought his car in for the compression test, we found that when started cold, you would have to hold the accelerator pedal down to keep the RPM elevated substantially to keep the car from stalling out. During this time when the car wouldn’t hold an idle without stalling it smelled strongly of raw, unburned fuel. Since we hadn’t performed the tuning I was not overly concerned about the actual measured air fuel ratio at the time. That has proven to be an error in my judgment as this is the smoking gun in this case. Unfortunately, this was after engine break-in, after tuning, and after a track event on the car so in this case the damage was already done and irreversible (without re-honing).
When I looked for other companies who offer similar services as we do, I found a few references to this kind of scenario.
From Cosworth, a leading supplier of engines to professional motorsports teams:
Engine Break-in
“It is critical that your Cosworth engine is not started with an excessively rich fuel mixture. An excessively rich mixture will wash away the oil in the cylinders and the rings can potentially never break-in causing excessive oil consumption, crankcase blow-by and lower power output. This damage is permanent.”
From AMS who you may be more familiar with:
“*Make sure the car is tuned to a safe air/fuel ratio before any wide open throttle driving is done. Running a car too rich during break-in can wash down cylinder walls not allowing the piston rings to seat correctly.”
Since this engine left Agile in the back of a CRV and not installed in Thai’s Evo, never having been run, we were not allowed to tune the engine, and the car nor engine ever came back to Agile until after the first track day, it was quite obvious to us that the glazing occurred due to circumstances outside of our control and was not of our creation.
In spite of Agile not being responsible for the glazing, we offered to fix the engine for a total of $270 plus cost of machine work (hone and clean). This is miles below what we would normally charge. We also asked that Thai supply the replacement rings and we recommended that he also replace the bearings (we prefer never to reuse). He had supplied all the parts up to this time since he has his own dealer accounts. This was done in good faith because we wanted Thai out there racing as badly as he wanted to be out there racing.
We heard nothing from the customer for several weeks after offering to fix the engine at a greatly discounted price. My machine shop wanted the block gone and I didn’t want to bring it back to them whenever it was decided to invest in making it operational again so, in error, I asked the machine shop to go ahead and hone it so it would be ready for reassembly. In retrospect this was a huge mistake as the customer believes that the piston to wall clearance was the cause of the problem.
One thing worth noting, however, is that all the ring gaps, piston to wall clearances and bore measurements were recorded during assembly on our build sheet and confirmed in front of the customer while he watched us take apart the engine. It is true that we typically don’t publish or share our build tolerances with the end user of our engines. This has always been our policy and is nothing new. When the customer came to see the engine disassembled we offered to show him the build sheet and told him the only thing he could not do was take a photo of it but that we would gladly verify any measurement on the sheet against the engine we were disassembling. We allowed him to oversee the entire disassembly of the long block. We had nothing to hide and the upmost faith in our assembly, but we certainly did want to be sure that we had not caused the blow by problem.
The assertion that the piston to wall clearance was too tight is incorrect in this case. To the experienced eye, that will be clear from looking at the pictures that the customer posted in his complaint above. When the piston to wall is set too tight and the pistons expands as heat is transferred into the forgings from the combustion process, they will expand to the point where the clearance between the skirt and the wall is no longer sufficient for oil to lubricate the skirt and prevent metal on metal contact. This breakdown in lubrication will cause substantially more scoring than is evident on this customer’s pistons or bores because there quite literally is no lubrication at all.
“Why is there some scoring and minor skirt wear?” is the obvious next question. This kind of wear is often found in engines that are operated on excessively rich fuel mixtures. As the cylinder is overloaded with fuel that cannot be burned in the combustion process, the excess fuel lines the bores, impairing ring seal (commonly referred to as fuel wash) and runs down below the rings. Once the fuel makes its way past the rings it will break down the normal coating of oil on the bores that lubricates and protects the skirts from scuffing. As I’m sure you’re all aware, gasoline is not a good lubricant, and oil with high concentrations of gasoline in it will lose viscosity and break down. This mode of wear is not the total lack of or near total lack of lubrication that would be found in an overly tight piston to wall scenario, but it will cause the oil to lose film strength and viscosity, resulting in greatly accelerated wear as evidenced by the abraded skit coatings and scuffed points low in the bores. The reason for the scuffing only occurring low in the bore is that this is where high rod angles will push the piston into the wall in the absence of proper oil film strength. If this were an overly tight piston to wall clearance you would find scoring from the lowest point of piston travel in the bore to the upper point in the bore where the skirt tops out at top dead center. The scoring will follow the travel of the skirt because it is the widest portion of the piston.
Enough technobabble.
I certainly understand this customers frustrations. No one wants to have to build a motor twice, including us, especially when we have heavily discounted the initial build and offered heavy discounts on the reassembly after the glazing. We had fully exhausted our annual sponsorship budget before we took on this customer’s first race engine build but we saw promise in his driving and wanted to be a part of his race program. If the circumstances were different we may have covered the rebuild as a further sponsorship, but our other customers who were at the track for the same event reported back to us that the customer immediately and publicly began finger pointing and portraying us negatively. This is absolutely the fastest, worst way to terminate a sponsorship. Regardless of the finger pointing, we would have taken responsibility and make things right if the problem was of our creation.
There is one inaccuracy with the account of events above that I would like to contest. The complaint mentions that the warranty was canceled or declined before the engine was disassembled. This is not the case. I warned the customer that there was no further sponsorship available and that if we took the engine apart and were not responsible for the failure, that he would be charged for the reassembly. I didn’t outright decline warranty coverage until the head machinist at our machine shop confirmed our findings following the disassembly. I wanted to be certain that the customer understood that there was a possibility that he would be charged. During the initial conversation about the denial of warranty with the customer there was no arguing or even questioning of our diagnosis. The customer’s frustrations didn’t become apparent until he came to pick up his disassembled engine after declining the reassembly. At this time, he became combative to the point that my staff thought there would be an altercation in spite of their efforts to calm him down and explain our findings and position. Word later came down to me that he had made physical threats to my staff and that if my wife and child had not been present that he would have assaulted my service writer, who had nothing to do with the situation and was simply the bearer of bad news.
We cut off all ties with the customer, believing that no amount of evidence or explaining was going to change his predetermined conclusion that we were at fault and that he should not have to pay for services performed. The unfortunate side of this industry is that some think that a certain amount of complaining and threats of public humiliation will change the facts and/or financial burdens of repair. We have to draw a line in the sand and stick to the side of what is just for all parties involved. Has this been a constructive use of my time to fight over a $270 rebuild? No, obviously this is not a good use of my time and I have a lot more than the 3 hours we would have billed to rebuild it in dealing with the denial of warranty and subsequent blowback. However, we cannot sit back and allow ourselves and our business to be taken advantage of simply because of very vocal complaining, with no signs of wrongdoing on our part.
In spite of the events that have transpired, I have no ill will towards this customer and I hope that his experiences with other shops serve him better.
If anyone would like further information on our findings with regard to the customer’s engine please feel free to contact me.
-Hill
Agile Auto
Feb 11, 2015, 09:58 AM
#15
Agile - Your detailed response is great, but there seems to be an inconsistency in that the cylinder walls were deemed to be glazed which as best as I can tell means that oil got cooked into the cylinder walls, presumably reducing friction and preventing ring seating. However, running rich apparently washes down the cylinder walls and would seem to prevent glazing. I'm not trying to contest your assessment, but rather just trying to make sense of it.