Chain lubrication

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by Sam Ford, Mar 25, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Gary Young

    Gary Young Guest

    Derk Drukker <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 08:49:50 +0100, Benjamin Lewis wrote:
    >
    > >>> So? That's why you oil your chain afterwards.
    > NO, the oil won't be able to restore the lubrication and will wear out faster then if you would
    > just wipe dirt off with a piece of cloth. Cleaning your chain with liquid degreaser will cause
    > faster wear. Your chain will look nicer, but you'll have to replace it sooner.
    >
    > > Again, so what? I have a brand spanking new "lubrication layer" of oil.
    > It won't get inside the chain. It is pressed out, whilst the original grease won't be pressed out.

    Why won't it get inside the chain? After all, dirt gets in there easily enough. "Pressed out"
    suggests that it gets in, but then is forced out. If so, why isn't the original grease pressed out?
    What's so special about the original grease? Is there some kind of grease or oil that can't be
    displaced by metal-on-metal contact?

    If the original grease can be gotten out by using the wrong kind of degreaser, then why can't the
    dirt be gotten out? Isn't the dirt suspended in the grease or oil?

    >
    > > My chain still runs smoothly over 600 km later (and possibly much further).
    > I always used Campa C9 chains and did 6500 km with them, without using any cleaner. I just rubbed
    > the dirt off with a piece of cloth.
    >
    > > Why would I want the "original lubrication" to still be
    > > there, probably filled with dirt causing my chain to wear?
    > Because independent lab results showed afterr taking many chains apart, that your statement is not
    > correct.

    If the original lubricant is still in there, why add oil at all? Wouldn't the recommendation be just
    to keep the outside clean and add no oil? After all, we know that new oil can't get in there anyway.
    ("But then Rohloff couldn't sell its magic elixer," my cynical side says.)

    >
    > MAybe you'll believe the Rohloff company. They say: "the inside of a chain, where dirt builds up,
    > can't be cleaned anyway (in other words: you remove the oil, but the dirt stays inside). So don't
    > use degreasers, but only use something that doesn't degrease for 100% like Diesel or petroleum".
    > (from Rohloff tech info: chain maintenance). Rohloff says so, as does Campagnolo. If you think a
    > shiny chain is more important then wear, you should clean it with degrease, but you'll only clean
    > the outside, not the inside where it really matters.

    I don't know anything about diesel, but I thought people used it to clean their chains precisely
    because it is a degreaser. Does diesel contain some kind of oil to make cars and trucks run
    smoothly? Is that why Rohloff recommends it -- it cleans and leaves behind a protective oil film? If
    so, that would seem to run counter to the idea that new oil can't be introduced into the places
    where it matters.

    I'm curious how Tour magazine cleaned the chains in its tests -- did they use one of the scrubbers
    that are on the market or did they remove the chain from the bike and immerse it in degreaser,
    rinsing several times to get rid of suspended dirt? What kind of oil did they use in these tests
    that supposedly show that oil won't replace the original lubrication?

    By the way, if the original lubricant isn't removed except by degreasers, why will a chain left in
    the rain start squeaking? Isn't that a sign that there's no lubrication left?

    The manufacturer recommendations don't make much sense to me. Here's what SRAM says on its website:

    "Clean dirty chains before oiling. [Thus contradicting Rohloff's claims about cleaning being
    impossible.] Do not use any grease-dissolving or acidic agents. [Is there a difference between a
    degreaser and a grease-dissolver?] Cleaning agents must be rinsed off after a few minutes with
    water. [Why? Sounds similar to Rohloff's claim about leaving behind the original oil.] Apply oil
    after chain is completely dry."

    Here's what Campagnolo says in the brochure for its new spray lube (from the Campagnolo website):

    "Dirt and lack of lubricant accelerate wear to the chain. Before lubricating, thoroughly clean the
    drive system ... with a brush or cloth saturated with an appropriate degreaser or detergent.
    [Rohloff says degreasers are bad, right?] Do not remove the chain for cleaning and lubrication." [Is
    that because a thorough cleaning is bad or (more likely in my opinion) because Campagnolo is worried
    that people won't know how to reassemble the chain properly?]
     


  2. Bosaci

    Bosaci Guest

    "Derk Drukker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:p[email protected]...
    > Hello Tom, On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 03:54:40 +0100, TBGibb wrote:
    >
    > > What "chemical" is being used here? Solvents? Acid? Alkali?
    > The things that are sold in bikeshops as "chain degreasers". According to the tests performed,
    > only Diesel doesn't do any harm.

    bullshit!

    > Greets, Derk
     
  3. Derk Drukker

    Derk Drukker Guest

    On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 21:44:33 +0100, Gary Young wrote:

    >
    > Why won't it get inside the chain? After all, dirt gets in there easily enough.
    It gets in, but doesn't stay in.

    >"Pressed out" suggests that it gets in, but then is forced out. If so, why isn't the original
    >grease pressed out?
    Because it's thicker.

    This is what the magazine (a VERY serious magazine) did: they took loads of chains. Some were oiled,
    some weren't, some were just wiped off, others were cleaned with different degreasers. After testing
    they took them apart and took pictures of the inside of a chain Pictures of taken apart chains were
    published. The results were:
    1) If you want to degrease, only use diesel or petroleum, but no other degreasers.
    2) It's just as good not to degrease, but to wipe the chain clean with a piece of cloth.
    3) All degreasers other than diesel and petroleum destroy the original lubrication.

    >What's so special about the original grease? Is there some kind of grease or oil that can't be
    >displaced by metal-on-metal contact?
    I'll re-read the article for you and tell you about it.

    > If the original grease can be gotten out by using the wrong kind of degreaser, then why can't the
    > dirt be gotten out? Isn't the dirt suspended in the grease or oil?
    I'll look that up too.

    > I don't know anything about diesel, but I thought people used it to clean their chains precisely
    > because it is a degreaser. Does diesel contain some kind of oil to make cars and trucks run
    > smoothly?
    Diesel doesn't degrease for 100% like other degreasers and on top of that it evaporates. Wait a
    minute: that was the reason: most degreasers leave traces of it in the chain when you use them to
    degrease the chain and destroy the oil you use to lubricate after cleaning.

    > oil film? If so, that would seem to run counter to the idea that new oil can't be introduced into
    > the places where it matters.
    It can, but it doesn't stay inside for a long period.

    > I'm curious how Tour magazine cleaned the chains in its tests -- did they use one of the scrubbers
    > that are on the market or did they remove the chain from the bike and immerse it in degreaser,
    > rinsing several times to get rid of suspended dirt? What kind of oil did they use in these tests
    > that supposedly show that oil won't replace the original lubrication?
    I'll tell you tomorrow after I re-read the article again.

    > "Clean dirty chains before oiling. [Thus contradicting Rohloff's claims about cleaning being
    > impossible.]
    No, they also say clean it, but that means with a cloth, not with a degreaser.

    >Do not use any grease-dissolving or acidic agents.
    An acidic agent attacks the metal of the chain.

    > grease-dissolver?] Cleaning agents must be rinsed off after a few minutes with water.
    because it will destroy the oil you use to lubricate the chain.

    > "Dirt and lack of lubricant accelerate wear to the chain. Before lubricating, thoroughly clean the
    > drive system ... with a brush or cloth saturated with an appropriate degreaser or detergent.
    > [Rohloff says degreasers are bad, right?]
    Detergent means the thing you use to wash dishes I think.

    > Do not remove the chain for cleaning and lubrication." [Is that because Campagnolo is worried that
    > people won't know how to reassemble the chain properly?]
    I think so :)

    I'll look up the article again tonight.

    BTW: TOUR really does a good job on tests and publish only really reliable test results. They are
    known for that. I really believe what they say. What they recommend is what is cheapest according to
    me: only use diesel when you *really* need to degrease a chain, only apply an oil of a good
    thickness: too thin and it won't do anything, too thick and it won't get inside your chain.

    I think a lot of money is earned by selling all these spray cans and degreasers.

    The only reason I recommend Rohloff is because I am very happy with it. I am certain there will me
    many more good oils on the market, but not here in Holland where everybody seems to use Teflon
    and/or silicon spray. I even had to order this oil from Germany, because it's not sold in bikeshops.
    I seem to be one of the last persons here to use real oil instead of spraycans.

    BTW: according to the test, silicon and teflon do nothing for your chain.

    Greets, Derk
     
  4. Derk Drukker

    Derk Drukker Guest

    OK here we go:

    From : TOUR nr 8, August 2001, Original text. Ing. Dirk Zedler

    The article says:

    "Inside the chain there is fat to start with. The fat is destroyed when you use degreasers. The
    degreasers have "tensides?" in them, that destroy the chemical structure of the fat inside the chain
    and causes the destruction of what they call "basic lubrication(=fat). On top of this, the chain
    doesn't get really clean inside. If you then apply oil on it, traces of the degreaser that are left
    inside the chain destroy the oil.

    They say about cleaning: just clean by wrapping a cloth around the chain with one hand and turn the
    chain around with your other hand. Only rinse it with clear water after a ride that leaves dirt and
    sand on your chain.

    Silicon is not helpful, because it does nothing when two metals are pressed on each other.teflon is
    also a waste of money in this case. This leaves wax, oil and fat. Oil of average viscosity is
    recommended.

    Apply oil regularly. even in good weather every 200-300 km's".
     
  5. Derk Drukker

    Derk Drukker Guest

    On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 21:56:18 +0100, bosaci wrote:

    > bullshit!
    Thank you for your well balanced input with fine nuances.

    Greets, Derk
     
  6. Derk Drukker wrote:

    > This is what the magazine (a VERY serious magazine) did: they took loads of chains. Some were
    > oiled, some weren't, some were just wiped off, others were cleaned with different degreasers.
    > After testing they took them apart and took pictures of the inside of a chain Pictures of taken
    > apart chains were published. The results were:
    > 1) If you want to degrease, only use diesel or petroleum, but no other degreasers.
    > 2) It's just as good not to degrease, but to wipe the chain clean with a piece of cloth.
    > 3) All degreasers other than diesel and petroleum destroy the original lubrication.

    These are not results, they are conclusions that the authors drew from their results. This is an
    important distinction. I haven't seen their results, but in any case I'm not convinced they support
    the conclusions.

    > The only reason I recommend Rohloff is because I am very happy with it. I am certain there will me
    > many more good oils on the market, but not here in Holland where everybody seems to use Teflon
    > and/or silicon spray. I even had to order this oil from Germany, because it's not sold in
    > bikeshops. I seem to be one of the last persons here to use real oil instead of spraycans.

    Surely motor oil and chainsaw oil is available in Holland? You don't have to buy everything for your
    bicycle in a bike shop.

    I'm not trying to convince you to get rid of your Rohloff lube; after all you already have it, and
    it make work as well as chainsaw oil. However, you haven't offered any evidence that it works
    *better*, and it costs ten times as much, so I see little reason to recommend it to others.

    > BTW: according to the test, silicon and teflon do nothing for your chain.

    I tried White Lightning for a while, and would not recommend it, especially for people who ride in
    the rain. I had to apply it frequently, and my chain started to rust.

    --
    Benjamin Lewis

    Amoebit: Amoeba/rabbit cross; it can multiply and divide at the same time.
     
  7. Derk Drukker

    Derk Drukker Guest

    On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 22:56:35 +0100, David Kunz wrote:

    > And, if you filter and reuse the solvent, you get your favorite lube reapplied when the solvent
    > evaporates :).
    Sound like a good idea! :)

    Greets, Derk
     
  8. Derk Drukker

    Derk Drukker Guest

    On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 22:41:20 +0100, Benjamin Lewis wrote:

    > Derk Drukker wrote: These are not results, they are conclusions that the authors drew from their
    > results.
    You're right. I couldn't find that term in English when I needed it.

    > This is an important distinction. I haven't seen their results, but in any case I'm not convinced
    > they support the conclusions.
    You should see the picture of a chain that was taken apart, that had been treated with degreasers in
    contrast to one that hadn't been treated: the one that had never been degreased showed a clear layer
    of fat inside the chain, the other had nothing left.

    > Surely motor oil
    I tried it, but I found it too thick.

    > and chainsaw oil is available in Holland?
    It will come as a surprise to you, but chainsaws are not something one sees here that often. I think
    I have never seen anyone use them in fact.

    > I'm not trying to convince you to get rid of your Rohloff lube; after all you already have it, and
    > it make work as well as chainsaw oil.
    The article says to use oil of moderate viscosity, doesn't matter what brand.

    > However, you haven't offered any evidence that it works *better*, and it costs ten times as much,
    > so I see little reason to recommend it to others.
    I would buy cheaper oil too if I could find it, but in comparison to the spray cans that are sold
    here, it's very cheap.

    > I tried White Lightning for a while, and would not recommend it, especially for people who ride in
    > the rain. I had to apply it frequently, and my chain started to rust.
    That is something I also read in TOUR magazine. If I remember well they say you have to degrease the
    chain B4 applying it. Not recommended! ;-)

    Greets, Derk
     
  9. Derk Drukker wrote:

    > On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 22:41:20 +0100, Benjamin Lewis wrote:
    >
    >> Derk Drukker wrote: These are not results, they are conclusions that the authors drew from their
    >> results.
    > You're right. I couldn't find that term in English when I needed it.
    >
    >> This is an important distinction. I haven't seen their results, but in any case I'm not convinced
    >> they support the conclusions.
    > You should see the picture of a chain that was taken apart, that had been treated with degreasers
    > in contrast to one that hadn't been treated: the one that had never been degreased showed a clear
    > layer of fat inside the chain, the other had nothing left.

    I thought you said there was dirt left?

    Also, do they have evidence that removing this "fat layer" is a bad thing, if it's subsequently
    replaced by an oil layer?

    I would like to see the pictures though. Do you have access to a scanner?

    --
    Benjamin Lewis

    Amoebit: Amoeba/rabbit cross; it can multiply and divide at the same time.
     
  10. Marnu

    Marnu Guest

    >>I expect this will have been discussed here at length but I have only been taking the group for a
    >>short time and haven't seen it. What is the most efficient way to maintain and lubricate a bike
    >>chain? Perhaps someone could point me to a site where this is discussed.
    >

    Ya'll gotta be kiddin'! Spit's the cleaner and 'possum fat's the lube. -- Cliff Shaw (Have you even
    HEARD of Oildale CA?)
     
  11. Derk Drukker

    Derk Drukker Guest

    On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 23:56:16 +0100, Benjamin Lewis wrote:

    >> You should see the picture of a chain that was taken apart, that had been treated with degreasers
    >> in contrast to one that hadn't been treated: the one that had never been degreased showed a clear
    >> layer of fat inside the chain, the other had nothing left.
    >
    > I thought you said there was dirt left?
    I think you should see the dirt on a microscopic level. I'll rephrase that for you. (Please don't
    forget English isn't my language): One could clearly see that the chain that had been degreased had
    a destroyed fat layer inside, whilst the chain that had always been wiped off with a cloth still had
    an intact orginal fat layer inside.

    > Also, do they have evidence that removing this "fat layer" is a bad thing, if it's subsequently
    > replaced by an oil layer?
    They measured in another article 19 diefferent chains and tested them for long-life, etc etc.If I
    remember well it were the results of these tests that made them draw these conlusions. The tests
    were carried out by Dirk Zedler, who has a website: www.zedler.de There you can also admire a
    collection of broken bike parts. Zedler has a very good reputation for carrying out tests. You can
    see parts of these artilces on his website. You could always mail him and tell him that a discussion
    has been going on about degreasing chains and that you read he wrote an article about chain
    maintenance in Tour and if he could explain to you why degreasing is such a bad thing if you oil the
    chain afterward.

    > I would like to see the pictures though. Do you have access to a scanner?
    I do, but I have to reinstall it for the following off-topic reason that I am certain I could
    discuss about for a long time: I have liberated my computer of Windows and use Linux now, but my
    scanner is a USB scanner that is known to be diffficult to install under Linux. But boy: am I happy
    all software is free for Linux! I'll see what I can do. Could take a while, though.

    Greets, Derk
     
  12. Jobst Brandt

    Jobst Brandt Guest

    Derk Drukker writes:

    > From : TOUR nr 8, August 2001, Original text. Ing. Dirk Zedler

    > The article says:

    > "Inside the chain there is grease to start with. The grease is destroyed when you use degreasers.
    > The degreasers have "tensides?" in them, that destroy the chemical structure of the grease inside
    > the chain and causes the destruction of what they call "basic lubrication (grease). On top of
    > this, the chain doesn't get really clean inside. If you then apply oil on it, traces of the
    > degreaser that are left inside the chain destroy the oil.

    This is a veiled threat that only lubricants packaged by bicycle suppliers are safe to use. What is
    far more damaging to a chain is to lubricate it when it is dirty, because it is grit that destroys
    chains, not solvents.

    > They say about cleaning: just clean by wrapping a cloth around the chain with one hand and turn
    > the chain around with your other hand. Only rinse it with clear water after a ride that leaves
    > dirt and sand on your chain.

    The dirt on the outside of the chain may have aesthetically unpleasing nature but it does not harm
    the chain. Only by rubbing it into the joints and adding oil will it form grinding paste inside the
    pin and sleeve, there where wear is damaging.

    > Silicones are not helpful, because they do nothing when two metals are pressed on each other.
    > Teflon is also a waste of money in this case. This leaves wax, oil and grease. Oil of average
    > viscosity is recommended.

    ...on a dirty chain. This will improve chain sales as they wear out much faster than if allowed to
    run dry and squeaky.

    > Apply oil regularly. even in good weather every 200-300 km's".

    That's more than twice a week for active riders! More grinding paste! Don't miss:

    http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/8d.2.html

    Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA
     
  13. Derk Drukker wrote:

    > On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 23:56:16 +0100, Benjamin Lewis wrote:
    >
    >>> You should see the picture of a chain that was taken apart, that had been treated with
    >>> degreasers in contrast to one that hadn't been treated: the one that had never been degreased
    >>> showed a clear layer of fat inside the chain, the other had nothing left.
    >>
    >> I thought you said there was dirt left?
    > I think you should see the dirt on a microscopic level. I'll rephrase that for you. (Please don't
    > forget English isn't my language): One could clearly see that the chain that had been degreased
    > had a destroyed fat layer inside, whilst the chain that had always been wiped off with a cloth
    > still had an intact orginal fat layer inside.

    Well, this is what one would expect, after all. I'm not convinced that this original layer
    remains even on the surfaces that experience high pressure/friction, which are the areas we are
    concerned with.

    >> Also, do they have evidence that removing this "fat layer" is a bad thing, if it's subsequently
    >> replaced by an oil layer?
    > They measured in another article 19 diefferent chains and tested them for long-life, etc etc.If I
    > remember well it were the results of these tests that made them draw these conlusions. The tests
    > were carried out by Dirk Zedler, who has a website: www.zedler.de There you can also admire a
    > collection of broken bike parts.

    Unfortunately my German is only marginally better than my Swahili, so I cannot get the full benefit
    of the site.

    The test I would be interested in would not involve 19 different chains; rather 19 identical chains
    systematically treated in different ways (if this is not what you meant.)

    I haven't been cycling long enough since I started using real lubricant to know how long my chains
    last. For convenience, I use 3 chains in rotation. After 4000 km, the only one of these chains that
    has any wear at all that I can see has "stretched" by at most 1/64" over 12 links -- it appears to
    be less than that, but that's around the limit I can measure with this ruler. If we assume that this
    chain has been used exactly one third of the time, and if I replace it when it's 1/16" longer at 12
    links, it will last for over 5300 km. This is very much a lower bound, though -- I suspect I've used
    it for more than 4000/3 km, and I think it's elongation is less than
    1/64". I'll just have to wait (and bicycle) and see, I guess.

    I just took apart links from one of my "clean" chains, and my current dirty chain. There was indeed
    dirt in the clean chain, but there was a lot more dirt in the dirty chain.

    I'm also not convinced the mineral spirits with which I clean my chains leave any "residue" to break
    down the oil later. I was under the impression that it all evaporated.

    > Zedler has a very good reputation for carrying out tests. You can see parts of these artilces on
    > his website. You could always mail him and tell him that a discussion has been going on about
    > degreasing chains and that you read he wrote an article about chain maintenance in Tour and if he
    > could explain to you why degreasing is such a bad thing if you oil the chain afterward.

    Nah, I'd rather argue about it on usenet :)

    >> I would like to see the pictures though. Do you have access to a scanner?
    > I do, but I have to reinstall it for the following off-topic reason that I am certain I could
    > discuss about for a long time: I have liberated my computer of Windows and use Linux now, but my
    > scanner is a USB scanner that is known to be diffficult to install under Linux. But boy: am I
    > happy all software is free for Linux! I'll see what I can do. Could take a while, though.

    Great, I look forward to it.

    --
    Benjamin Lewis

    Seeing is deceiving. It's eating that's believing.
    -- James Thurber
     
  14. David Kunz

    David Kunz Guest

    Derk Drukker wrote:
    > On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 21:44:33 +0100, Gary Young wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Why won't it get inside the chain? After all, dirt gets in there easily enough.
    >
    > It gets in, but doesn't stay in.
    >
    >
    >>"Pressed out" suggests that it gets in, but then is forced out. If so, why isn't the original
    >>grease pressed out?
    >
    > Because it's thicker.
    >
    > This is what the magazine (a VERY serious magazine) did: they took loads of chains. Some were
    > oiled, some weren't, some were just wiped off, others were cleaned with different degreasers.
    > After testing they took them apart and took pictures of the inside of a chain Pictures of taken
    > apart chains were published. The results were:
    > 1) If you want to degrease, only use diesel or petroleum, but no other degreasers.
    > 2) It's just as good not to degrease, but to wipe the chain clean with a piece of cloth.
    > 3) All degreasers other than diesel and petroleum destroy the original lubrication.

    This makes sense. However, what about adding lube to the degreaser so that it acts to carry it back
    in the chain and when it evaproates, leaves it behind? This happens by default if you filter and
    reuse the degreaser.

    AND, I ride a mountain bike -- frequently in water and rain. I find that wiping is totally
    inadequate. And the chain cleaners don't get the grit between the plates where it damages the gears.
    Did Tour also check for gear wear / life span?

    After reading a similar thread here last summer, I tried the wipe only thing and my shifting went
    south. I could hear the grit when I bent the chain. Cleaned the chain and all was well again. That
    was the shortest lived chain that I've ever had.

    I've tried chain cleaners with detergent and I've tried turpentine. I find that the turpentine leads
    to longer chain and gear life FOR ME IN MY CONDITIONS. This is based on replacing the chain at 1/16"
    wear over 6 links, and letting lube build-up in the turpentine by filtering and reusing it.

    ...
    > BTW: according to the test, silicon and teflon do nothing for your chain.

    Based on replacing chains as above, I've tried synthetic oil (several), teflon oil (finish line red
    cap), and wax based lubes. Synthetic oil loads-up in dusty conditions and I have to carry a bottle
    in my pack to re-oil the chain every so often (how does bar oil do here?). It also doesn't last well
    in water / on rainy days (even though it claims to). Ice wax was a bust for me. It wouldn't stay on
    the chain long enough for my rides and washed off on the first water crossing. The teflon oil adds
    about 500-1000 miles to my chain life -- consistently. Finish line's wax lube holds up pretty well
    also (in dust, rain, and on long rides), but I haven't used it long enough to say anything about
    it's chain life aspects. As always YMMV.

    David
     
  15. Derk Drukker

    Derk Drukker Guest

    On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 08:42:54 +0100, jobst.brandt wrote:
    >
    > ...on a dirty chain. This will improve chain sales as they wear out much faster than if allowed to
    > run dry and squeaky.
    In the winter when roads are coevred with sand and mud, my 8 speed
    Shimano chain lasts only 2000 km. In the summer it's at least 4000 km.

    What exactly is that citrus cleaning agent I read about on Sheldon's pages?

    Greets, Derk
     
  16. ...who cares wrote:
    > What's the bid deal fellas!?
    >
    > The way I see it is just stick anything on yer chain so long as it runs smoothly - I bet olive oil
    > would work for dry journeys. And when it shows even the slightest sign of wear just buy a new one
    > - Hell! They ain't expensive, and you're guaranteed a decent smooth running chain.

    That's my technique. 'Course, I ride mountain bikes, and there is just no way to keep the grit off
    the chain. After every ride, I just scrape the junk off and pour on one of the waxes until it shifts
    okay. A couple of months later, I get a new chain. :)

    Duke
     
  17. Jobst Brandt

    Jobst Brandt Guest

    Derk Drukker writes:

    >> ...on a dirty chain. This will improve chain sales as they wear out much faster than if allowed
    >> to run dry and squeaky.

    > In the winter when roads are covered with sand and mud, my 8 speed
    > Shimano chain lasts only 2000 km. In the summer it's at least 4000 km.

    > What exactly is that citrus cleaning agent I read about on Sheldon's pages?

    There are a number of cleaning agents for mechanical parts and hand cleansers that contain citric
    acid that cuts oils and allows them to be washed away with water.

    As hand cleaners they have the disadvantage that they remove nearly all surface oils from the skin
    and allow further contact with grime (typically other dirty machine parts) to adhere far more
    tenaciously to the skin and subsequent cleaning gets more difficult. There are lotions to ameliorate
    this effect, but you must purchase them in addition to the "Orange Cleaner" (comes in orange
    containers).

    Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA
     
  18. Matt O'Toole

    Matt O'Toole Guest

    <[email protected]> wrote in message news:p[email protected]...

    > There are a number of cleaning agents for mechanical parts
    and hand
    > cleansers that contain citric acid that cuts oils and
    allows them to be
    > washed away with water.

    This is what I always thought, until I found out the active ingredient in citrus degreasers is not
    citric acid, but L-limonene, a caustic compound also refined from orange peels. It's easy to have
    this misconception because citric acid too has been an effective and popular cleaning agent,
    particularly in the "good old days" when you could buy it generically at the hardware store, in
    powdered form.

    > As hand cleaners they have the disadvantage that they
    remove nearly
    > all surface oils from the skin and allow further contact
    with grime
    > (typically other dirty machine parts) to adhere far more
    tenaciously
    > to the skin and subsequent cleaning gets more difficult.

    This is true.

    > There are lotions to ameliorate this effect, but you must purchase
    them in
    > addition to the "Orange Cleaner" (comes in orange
    containers).

    Nothing special is needed, although special, expensive "barrier cream" is most effective. Any common
    moisturizing hand lotion will do. So will plain vaseline.

    Matt O.
     
  19. Ajames54™

    Ajames54™ Guest

    On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 19:25:51 GMT, "Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >
    ><[email protected]> wrote in message news:p[email protected]...
    >
    >> There are a number of cleaning agents for mechanical parts
    >and hand
    >> cleansers that contain citric acid that cuts oils and
    >allows them to be
    >> washed away with water.
    >
    >This is what I always thought, until I found out the active ingredient in citrus degreasers is not
    >citric acid, but L-limonene, a caustic compound also refined from orange peels. It's easy to have
    >this misconception because citric acid too has been an effective and popular cleaning agent,
    >particularly in the "good old days" when you could buy it generically at the hardware store, in
    >powdered form.
    >
    Before they found this wonderful new way to get rid of it (L-limonene) by selling it as a cleaner,
    it was classed as a hazardous waste product..

    Sort of like Ironite lawn Fertilizer...
     
  20. Paul Kopit

    Paul Kopit Guest

    On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 19:25:51 GMT, "Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >This is what I always thought, until I found out the active ingredient in citrus degreasers is not
    >citric acid, but L-limonene, a caustic compound also refined from orange peels. It's easy to have
    >this misconception because citric acid too has been an effective and popular cleaning agent,
    >particularly in the "good old days" when you could buy it generically at the hardware store, in
    >powdered form.

    Citrus terpenes come about when you commercially squeeze an orange. If you bend an orange peel
    and see that fine mist, that is the terpenes. When you hand squeeze oranges, the terpenes stay in
    the peel and the juice tastes sweeter. When you smash the entire orange, the terpenes go into the
    juice but the solubility is limited so a layer comes to the top of the vat. Only small quantities
    were useful long ago as raw materials for flavors and fragrances. Now, the stuff is sold as a
    safe solvent.

    Terpenes are powerful solvents that have low volatility and very limited water solubility. They will
    wash grease and grime very well but it is very difficult to get the terpenes off the part. You need
    lots of water and some detergeant as well.

    Safe? Yes you can squirt the stuff in your mouth but never get any in your eye. I cannot see how
    people clean chains by dunking in the orange miracle and then manage to get the solvent out so that
    a decent lubricant can go on.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...