Bike Chain Lube

[Bob]

On 30 Sep 2005 19:57:42 -0700, "Ron Ruff" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>I'll tell you mine. I've been using Kleen Guard furniture wax ($1 per
>can at Walmart) on a SRAM 9 speed chain. 3,800 miles so far, and no
>more than 1/32 inch wear. That is better service than I ever got with a
>bike lube. I never clean the chain other than what it gets from the
>lube-wipe. I get rained on fairly often (like today), but it doesn't
>seem to affect the chain. I went for 200 miles once without lubing it
>just to see if it would squeek... it didn't. I generally lube & wipe it
>every 100 miles or so.


So what about using something like a spray automotive Carnauba wax?
Wouldn't that be better than furniture wax (much thicker) and a
heck of a lot easier than paraffin & oil ? This is starting to
sound good!

 

[Ron Ruff]

Bob wrote:
>
> So what about using something like a spray automotive Carnauba wax?
> Wouldn't that be better than furniture wax (much thicker) and a
> heck of a lot easier than paraffin & oil ? This is starting to
> sound good!

Why not? I'm starting to think that keeping dirt/sand from sticking to
the chain is the most important thing, and waxy lubes do that best. It
isn't quiet like a heavy oil, though... but maybe that auto wax would
be better...

 

[[email protected]]

Ron Ruff writes:

>> So what about using something like a spray automotive Carnauba wax?
>> Wouldn't that be better than furniture wax (much thicker) and a
>> heck of a lot easier than paraffin & oil? This is starting to
>> sound good!

> Why not? I'm starting to think that keeping dirt/sand from sticking
> to the chain is the most important thing, and waxy lubes do that
> best. It isn't quiet like a heavy oil, though... but maybe that
> auto wax would be better...

Two effects make this unlikely to work as you describe and they are
that wax is not a liquid and cannot move to locations where the wax
has been displaced by frictional movement in the way that oil does.
The other is that water has a far greater affinity for metal surfaces
than wax and will be dislodged from sliding contact surfaces inside
the chain where lubrication should occur. Oils emulsify, and if not
washed entirely away by road water, remains when things dry off to
continue lubricating the chain.

Another aspect of this subject is that wax is as old as oil in the
business and people have tried all aspects of its use long ago. Using
wax as a lubricant is not a new discovery and it has limitations that
keep it from automotive use where there is substantial scientific R&D
work, unlike in bicycling.

Jobst Brandt

 

[[email protected]]

[email protected] wrote:
>
>
> Another aspect of this subject is that wax is as old as oil in the
> business and people have tried all aspects of its use long ago.

Yes. For example, some people have been using it as a chain lube since
long ago! I first tried it in the 1970s, and I assume it was done long
before that.

> Using
> wax as a lubricant is not a new discovery and it has limitations that
> keep it from automotive use where there is substantial scientific R&D
> work, unlike in bicycling.

I'm not aware of an automotive application that mimics the duty of a
bike chain - specifically, low speed intermittent pivoting motion,
unsealed in a dusty environment, where cleanliness is valued both for
equipment life and cosmetic reasons. The cosmetic reasons include both
keeping the bike clean and keeping the rider clean.

It may be that if cars had such an application, they'd use some
wax-based compound.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[[email protected]]

Frank Krygowski writes:

>> Another aspect of this subject is that wax is as old as oil in the
>> business and people have tried all aspects of its use long ago.

> Yes. For example, some people have been using it as a chain lube
> since long ago! I first tried it in the 1970s, and I assume it was
> done long before that.

>> Using wax as a lubricant is not a new discovery and it has
>> limitations that keep it from automotive use where there is
>> substantial scientific R&D work, unlike in bicycling.

> I'm not aware of an automotive application that mimics the duty of a
> bike chain - specifically, low speed intermittent pivoting motion,
> unsealed in a dusty environment, where cleanliness is valued both
> for equipment life and cosmetic reasons. The cosmetic reasons
> include both keeping the bike clean and keeping the rider clean.

Formerly heavy trucks and today motorcycles are chain driven with
all the exposure to contamination that bicycles experience.

> It may be that if cars had such an application, they'd use some
> wax-based compound.

Cosmetic goals conflict with functional goals. Even the best
automotive engines have blackened motor oil that cannot be made clean.
I haven't seen a motorcycle chain lube that doesn't generate black
slime.

Jobst Brandt

 

[[email protected]]

tomato packing equipment-the setup fits neatly into a large aircraft
hanger-travels the green, chartruese, and hard tomatoes (ripen on the
way)on conveyors powered by waxed chain drive off electric motors.
waxed gear wear is impressive but tomatos are oil free. the boxes and
the tomatos get a coat of wax.
i tried wax and found the CR mushrooming after a few miles.

 

[[email protected]]

i wuz cut off-
> i tried wax and found the CR mushrooming after a few miles.
like the tomato conveyor gears-
but this is on SR 10 speed CR's not
dirt bike CR's-of a different design where the chain runs over more off
a point than a flat surface as at the 10 speed: not flattening the
waxed chain surface and flaking it off but penetrating the chain
surface, bang, flaking dirt off the wax
wherefore the wax is meant actually for dirt use

a lot of old folk around here use wax and never clean the chain
but these geezers tend to haul the bike over to the LBS for work
even tire changing!

 

[Ron Ruff]

[email protected] wrote:
>
> Two effects make this unlikely to work as you describe

I would have thought so as well... but oddly enough it seems to work. I
just measured it again to make sure and the wear is closer to zero than
1/32 inch after 3,800 miles. Though the efficiency of a chain is not
well correlated with friction, I would expect the wear-rate to be well
correlated with friction... so I can only conclude that the furniture
wax is doing a good job of minimizing friction in the chain.

I *do* lube it often, but it is very easy to do (no actual cleaning),
and rag is nearly clean after wiping. Plus, the chain is never
silent... I can always hear the rollers, though it never squeaks.

 

[Dave Lehnen]

[email protected] wrote:
> Frank Krygowski writes:
>
>
>>>Another aspect of this subject is that wax is as old as oil in the
>>>business and people have tried all aspects of its use long ago.
>
>
>>Yes. For example, some people have been using it as a chain lube
>>since long ago! I first tried it in the 1970s, and I assume it was
>>done long before that.
>
>
>>>Using wax as a lubricant is not a new discovery and it has
>>>limitations that keep it from automotive use where there is
>>>substantial scientific R&D work, unlike in bicycling.
>
>
>>I'm not aware of an automotive application that mimics the duty of a
>>bike chain - specifically, low speed intermittent pivoting motion,
>>unsealed in a dusty environment, where cleanliness is valued both
>>for equipment life and cosmetic reasons. The cosmetic reasons
>>include both keeping the bike clean and keeping the rider clean.
>
>
> Formerly heavy trucks and today motorcycles are chain driven with
> all the exposure to contamination that bicycles experience.
>
Recent chain-driven road motorcycles use O-ring chains (or variations
like X-ring chains) almost exclusively. Chain life is 4 or 5 times
better than it was with conventional chains. It seems unlikely that
O-rings would be practical in narrow, flexible bicycle chains. They are
expensive even in motorcycle sizes, but very much worth the expense.

>
>>It may be that if cars had such an application, they'd use some
>>wax-based compound.
>
>
> Cosmetic goals conflict with functional goals. Even the best
> automotive engines have blackened motor oil that cannot be made clean.
> I haven't seen a motorcycle chain lube that doesn't generate black
> slime.
>
> Jobst Brandt

O-ring chains generate almost no black slime, unless it's inside the
seals where it is never seen. The outside needs only enough coating
to prevent rusting, and there are various not-too-sticky alternatives,
and people who swear by or at them.

Comparing brown used oil inside a car engine to the abrasive sludge that
collects on oiled bicycle chains is hardly fair. I don't think a car
engine would run for long on 5 quarts of bicycle chain sludge.

Dave Lehnen

 

[[email protected]]

[email protected] wrote:
> Frank Krygowski writes:
>
> > I'm not aware of an automotive application that mimics the duty of a
> > bike chain - specifically, low speed intermittent pivoting motion,
> > unsealed in a dusty environment, where cleanliness is valued both
> > for equipment life and cosmetic reasons. The cosmetic reasons
> > include both keeping the bike clean and keeping the rider clean.
>
> Formerly heavy trucks and today motorcycles are chain driven with
> all the exposure to contamination that bicycles experience.

True, of course. And not only heavy trucks. There were plenty of
chain driven cars in the very early days. Still, the chains were/are
kept far from contact with the operators.

>
> > It may be that if cars had such an application, they'd use some
> > wax-based compound.
>
> Cosmetic goals conflict with functional goals.

Sure. And conflicting goals are frequently a fact of life. But it's
not _only_ cosmetics that keep me waxing my chain.

I've mentioned before the old, old bike magazine article (not Bicycling
- some other road bike magazine from the 1970s, it's on file here
somewhere) in which a guy tested about eight varieties of chain lube,
riding each for many hundreds of miles and measuring wear (what most
call "stretch") per mile. He found paraffin produced the least chain
wear.

Anyway, it works for me. YMMV. But don't shoot it down without trying
it.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Chris Zacho The Wheelman]

I use paraffin (Candle wax to those of you on the other side of the
pond). It takes a bit more on the user's part to get it inside the
links, but I think that is balanced out by the fact that it cleans the
old lube out of the chain at the same time, instead of having to clean
it as a separate operation.

- -

"May you have the winds at your back,
And a really low gear for the hills!"

Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

Chris'Z Corner
http://www.geocities.com/czcorner

 

[Chris Zacho The Wheelman]

The reason many people have to "Re-wax" after riding in the rain is
because they simply dip the chain in the melted wax. IOW, the wax was
simply deposited on the outside of the chain, rather than soaking in
between the links where it need to be.

Try heating the wax to at least 150 F when it will be fully liquid, and
soaking it for a few minutes to allow time fir it to penetrate INSIDE
the links. Then hang it, wiping off the excess from the outside before
it cools and solidifies. You'll find this way will yield much better
rain tolerance and overall performance from the wax.

How to clean and properly wax your chain at the same time:
http://www.geocities.com/czcorner/tech3.html

- -

"May you have the winds at your back,
And a really low gear for the hills!"

Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

Chris'Z Corner
http://www.geocities.com/czcorner

 

[Chris Zacho The Wheelman]

Frank K, How do you keep the torch from igniting the wax?

- -

"May you have the winds at your back,
And a really low gear for the hills!"

Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

Chris'Z Corner
http://www.geocities.com/czcorner

 

[[email protected]]

Chris Zacho "The Wheelman" wrote:
> Frank K, How do you keep the torch from igniting the wax?

I don't do anything special. I've never had a problem with that.

The torch flame is quite low - perhaps 1" long out of its nozzle. I
just try to warm the chain up enough for the wax to flow. The chain
gets hot to the touch, but not extremely hot.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Bob]

On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 19:42:54 -0400, [email protected] (Chris Zacho
"The Wheelman") wrote:

>
>How to clean and properly wax your chain at the same time:
>http://www.geocities.com/czcorner/tech3.html


I like the wax idea but I have to admit that chain wear is not really
an issue - chains are cheap and easy to find. But, how does wax vs.
oil work out when we consider the wear on alloy chainwheels? Has
anyone measured this ? A vintage chainwheel has a lot more value to me
than a chain. I can see some of the same arguments (i.e. less dirt =
less wear on the chainwheels) but has there been any non-subjective
evaluation this?

Bob

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 14:41:36 GMT, Bob <[email protected]> wrote:

>I like the wax idea but I have to admit that chain wear is not really
>an issue - chains are cheap and easy to find. But, how does wax vs.
>oil work out when we consider the wear on alloy chainwheels? Has
>anyone measured this ? A vintage chainwheel has a lot more value to me
>than a chain. I can see some of the same arguments (i.e. less dirt =
>less wear on the chainwheels) but has there been any non-subjective
>evaluation this?

Dirt's the only factor there, since lubricating the teeth is impossible.

Jasper

 

[Andrew Price]

On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 19:42:54 -0400, [email protected] (Chris Zacho
"The Wheelman") wrote:

[---]

>How to clean and properly wax your chain at the same time:
>http://www.geocities.com/czcorner/tech3.html

Interesting article, but as I suppose the wax is re-used several times
("A pound of wax will run you about $1.50 and that should last you
about a year"), how do you keep "all the embedded dirt, grime, old
lube and worn particles of metal" which are flushed out of the chain
from contaminating the wax?

Or have I misunderstood, and is the wax used "one-shot" and then
discarded?

 

[Bob]

On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 20:51:46 GMT, Jasper Janssen <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>Dirt's the only factor there, since lubricating the teeth is impossible.
>
>Jasper

Don't you think that the presence of lubricant on the inner chain
plates has an effect on the chainwheels? Most of the "worn out"
chainwheels I've seen have side wear problems. The rollers don't
really seem to wear the teeth in the drive plane. So, I would think
the presence of a lubricant would reduce steel to alloy friction and
therefore reduce side wear.

?

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 23:51:00 GMT, Bob <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 20:51:46 GMT, Jasper Janssen <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>Dirt's the only factor there, since lubricating the teeth is impossible.

>Don't you think that the presence of lubricant on the inner chain
>plates has an effect on the chainwheels? Most of the "worn out"
>chainwheels I've seen have side wear problems. The rollers don't
>really seem to wear the teeth in the drive plane. So, I would think
>the presence of a lubricant would reduce steel to alloy friction and
>therefore reduce side wear.

Hmm. I dunno. Most side wear is from non-straight chainline in derailer
systems, and I wonder if the pressure on those facets is small enough to
tolerate lubrication at those points.

Jasper

 

[[email protected]]

oh puheese lube the gears. run the chain backwards and hold the bottle
upside down with the nipple going ticvktivcktick on tooth tops. zzzzick
done. so when the chain hits that CR or cog first off after cleaning
there's a skim board effect tween chain and gear surface. squish..
by the way-temps are falling and that valvo racing 50 wait synthetic at
$3/Qt iza lookin good!