jawnn

it could be that the people on the other forum were not thinking clearly. or perhaps your self. I have a long history of asking the wrong question because I do not have enough information to start with.

I do like Chain-L and that is why I wanted to make some. I am just one of those obsessive guys that love to figure things out.

If FBinNY had said that he starts with a long chain alkene, with a double bond in the end... Reacts it with water, then oxidize it all the way to carboxylic acid... to get a long chain fatty acid. then React 3 moles of this with 1 mole of glycerol, I would think that chain-l is something very special, just because it would take a lot of skill to make it.

demoncyclist

Without pressure, they don't really carry much out of the chain. Again, that is what cleaning is for (to whatever extent the solvent can, given whatever pressure used to flush the chain out- or not). The only way to keep most of the contaminants out of a chain is to clean it periodically. The lubricant that is filling the space between the parts of the chain is helping to keep them out as well. But it can hardly be called "washing". That was really my point.

FBinNY 

Some people are impressed with technical jargon, they probably wouldn't understand anyway. I'm not and have never marketed that way. When I manufactured tools (Kingsbridge) I likewise never got into talking spec. I didn't even offer a guaranty. I simply said they would do the job better than the competition, and let the reputation grow and speak for itself.

You will never hear me get into details except for promised results. It's just not my way. A customer is pays for and is entitled to the promised results, not the details of how I delivered them. I don't ask Joe in Mt. Vernon what's in his pizza, he doesn't ask what's in my oil.

noglider 

Cleaning the chain is not the only way to keep dirt out. I don't clean chains. I just replace them. That works, too.

@jawnn, the formula to Chain-L is a trade secret. We don't really have the option of discussing how lubricants are made. We can speak of observable properties.

I've used many kinds of lubricants for chains. Most recently, I've used ATF, chainsaw oil, Chain-L, T-9, Triflow, and another bike brand whose name I can't remember. They all work, if you adjust your re-application interval appropriately.

jawnn

I seem to remember a conversation about the chain-l that "long chain molecule " was mentioned.

ThermionicScott 

If you had worked with Monsanto to develop better lubricants using alien DNA, you wouldn't want to reveal much about it either. So for all of our sakes, quit prying.

Bill Kapaun

To answer the question-
There was ONE guy in Panama that tried substituting STP for Chain-L.
He was never heard from again.

LesterOfPuppets

He probably got blowed up. Blowed up real good.

LesterOfPuppets

I've been using this stuff for the last few months. Works quite well. Washes off in the rain kinda easy, but holds on better than Triflo or White Lightning.

Mentions paraffin on the back label but it all stays in solution.

jyl

I'm not familiar with White Lightning. I know Triflo washes off so quickly in rainy conditions that I practically have to re-apply every day. I don't like lubing chains, so I want a lube I can apply and then forget about for a month, during the rains of the PacNW winter.

Although, we don't seem to be having a winter this year :-(

davidad

It's fun watching rule number two at work, almost.

Joe Minton

I just published this in another thread but is seems to be appropriate here as well:


The whole idea is to separate metal parts moving against one another; if they do not touch – they cannot wear.

Story (true one):
A Norwegian hydroelectric turbine had been running for 65 years; it had never stopped turning, its bearings were never inspected. Those bearings were ‘hydrodynamic’; they depended upon a film of oil to separate the turning parts. The oil (a liter or so) was changed at intervals. At long-last, the turbine was shut down for a long-deferred overhaul. There was no wear, none, no wear on the bearing surfaces; the final dimensions (inner & outer) of the bearing surfaces were the same as when the turbine was first assembled. Why --- Because The Surfaces Never Touched. The lubricating oil separated them for 65 years!

If they do not touch – they cannot wear.

FbinNY has an effective solution: an oil that is thick and stays in place.

The reason that thick oil is needed in bicycle chains is that the spaces between moving and loaded parts of the chain are large and irregular. Also, the chain is not submerged in oil as it ‘ought’ to be.

The best we can do is apply some ‘form’ of oil that stays in place, is thick enough to be effective and, hopefully does not attract much attention from CRUD (Carbon, Rust and Undesirable Dirt).

Google “Chain Kote” and follow its history. Chain Kote won every motorcycle chain comparison test I know of and its secret was that is stayed in place between the bearing surfaces of the chains.


There is much, much more I can say but --- this is the fundamental truth: If the metal parts of your chain do not touch ---- they do not wear.

Joe

davidad

Older steamships had a wooden bearing supporting the end of the shaft and the propeller that were lubed by salt water. Maybe we need wooden chains. Lignum-Vitae-Bearings

dedhed

I bet this bike used STP for chain lube.

cyccommute 

Think about what you are saying. If lubricants can carry contaminants into the chain...hence the need for cleaning...they can certainly carry contaminants out of the chain. The problem is that there is an equilibrium in that the amount of contaminants carried out of the chain is exactly equal to the amount carried in. Many chain lubricants have a carrier solvent that acts to wash out the old dirty lubrication and the contaminants that it has gathered. The carrier solvent isn't there just to thin out the oil.

As for keeping the contaminants out, that can't be avoided if you use a lubricant that serves as a vehicle to trap the contaminants. Oils don't actually attract dirt but they certainly serve as a vehicle to hold any dirt that happens to hit the oil surface. And, once attached to the surface of the chain, the contaminants will find their way into the internals of the chain if the oil has a low enough viscosity to flow without a solvent. Just about any "oil" from 3-in-1 oil (originally developed as a bicycle chain lube) to Phil's Tenacious to STP to chainsaw oil has a low enough viscosity to flow.

"Cleaning" the chain periodically isn't the only way to keep the contaminants out. Not providing a vehicle for the contaminants to stick to the chain is another way to keep the contaminants out. Dry lube doesn't flow as well as wet lubricants so it may have to be refreshed (slightly) more but it has to be "clean" of far less frequently. I use dry lubricant exclusively and I only have to refresh it every 600 to 1000 miles and I never have to clean a chain.

rydabent

Wax in NOT a lubricant period. Ultra high priced "bicycle" are a waste of money. Just use a regular good quality oil. I for instance use Mobil 1.

cyccommute 

Tell that to skiers

The only thing that makes a petroleum "wax" different from an petroleum "oil" is molecular weight. "Petroleum jelly" which is what is used on new chains and generally recognized as a good lubricant is a "wax". It just happens to be a soft wax. Most wax based chain lubricants contain a mix of hard and soft waxes that are dissolved in a solvent. A "wax" might not be appropriate for use inside an engine where conditions are quite severe but they have enough lubricating properties for the lighter duty of bicycle chains.

As for using an engine oil for chain lubrication to save money, how often do you clean your chain? If cleaning your bike constantly is the point of owning a bike, then by all means save money by using motor oil on your chain. But if the point of owning a bike is to ride it as much as possible while spending as little time as possible on maintenance, there are much better alternatives. I doubt I replace chains any more often than you do and I know I spend a whole lot less time dealing with oil on the chain, frame and me than you do...as in I never have to clean oil off me, the frame or the chain.

noglider 

@cyccommute, can you give one or two examples of the dry lubricants you use? Do you think they'd work well in a humid environment?


This thread has convinced me to spend more on lubricant. I particularly appreciate @Joe Minton's post.

jyl

I think the topic of chain lube is confusing and/or contentious because users' priorities vary so widely. One person rides in dry conditions and cleans, maintains and lubes his bike frequently, his chain is always shiny clean. Another person rides in constant rain and puts his bike away wet, wanting to do as little cleaning and maintenance as possible, his chain is always dripping wet and black. A third rides in dry but dirty conditions, maybe mountain biking or gravel trails, and his chain is always covered in grit and dirt. One person uses expensive 10/11 speed or hollow pin chains and wants them to last. Another uses cheap 7 speed chains and would rather replace for $10 than bother to clean. These people will all have different lube needs and preferences, rationally so.

Bill Kapaun

Use a Candle to Keep Doors and Windows from Sticking

bigredkevbot

I live in a house with 4 other cyclists,9 bikes between us, and my girlfriend has another 3. With proper application (sparingly) Chain-L is currently protecting all of our chains and I still have more than 70% of the bottle left. I just wanted to put in my two-cents for Chain-L's quality.

cyccommute 

I use White Lightning and have exclusively for about 20 years. I've traveled by bicycle extensively throughout the US (New England to Mississippi, Virginia to Portland, OR) in a very wide variety of conditions and have still used White Lightning exclusively. I also ride year around here in Denver through snow storms and, more importantly, the melt that follows the storms. Most people don't understand what a Denver winter is like but we don't have snow lingering on the ground for long. We get snow (like yesterday) and it will be running in salt ladened rivulets by this afternoon. While my chains are generally used in dry conditions, winter takes its toll with much more water and much more salt. I still find White Lightning to be effective and, more importantly, cleaner.

I do have to apply it after a rainstorm or following a wet winter ride but I'm finding that I don't have to do it as often as I used to. As long as the chain doesn't squeak, I don't apply more.

You are mostly right. I disagree that the contention is due to users' "priorities" and has much more to do with their preferences and not a small part with "the way that ma' Daddy did it".

Of the above categories, I fall more into the third one...dry but dirty conditions...and discovered long ago that thick oils caused more problems than they solved. I used to use Phil Tenacious oil and did a whole lot of cleaning all the time. After using a dry lube, I found that the grit and garbage that I used to have to deal with all the time just wasn't a problem any more. There isn't anything to hold the grit on the chain. It saved a lot of time and I can actually touch my drivetrain without looking like a wildcatter after a gusher

noglider 

Interesting! My bottle of Chain-L ran out a while back. I'm going to buy another, and I'm also going to try White Lightning. Thanks!

And you're right: your climate is hard to imagine. I've known about how your snow typically melts fast because of the quick-changing weather, but I don't know much else. I've been there three times, but all too briefly in every case. I remember the weather man on TV referring to approaching snow. He said we were going to get a little snow, not much, only about 12 or 13 inches.

cyccommute 

12" of snow will get us a snow day around here. It's the 2" to 6" that's the real pain. Just enough to make driving interesting but not enough to close anything down. It's just annoying snow.

lopek77

+1

Lets stick to the main topic, which is lubrication. Wax is a totally different animal...nothing to do with lubrication process.