Hey all,

I know there's already threads over dry vs wet lube, how to care for the chain, etc. but I was doing some reading and found this article
that basically says that the wax from dry lube would be worn off in real-life scenarios (whereas a wet lube would flow back into place).

The quote from the passage: "If the chain is not inline during peak wattage, then the wax lube is sheared out between the plates, pins
and rollers...In real world cycling, chain deflection will “squeeze” the wax from between the plates...whereas a wet-lube will flow back
into the chain once load and deflection have eased"

I've searched and no threads explicitly mention this-- most are just describing what a dry or wet lube is, and posters naming preferences.
Is the shearing off for wax-based lubes a valid point? It sounds like it may be the reason as to why dry lubes need to be applied more often
(apart from wet conditions), but since I've only read this reason from one source I'm not sure how credible it is. Thanks!

I understand the author's argument; however, when wax is dissolved in solvent as in some lubricants, or melted as in Molten Wax, that wax is pretty tenacious stuff, especially the Molybdenum Disulfide found in Molten Wax (that stuff sticks to everything). It is really difficult to get wax off even if you want to. I find it hard to believe that a rotating chain has the ability to push a sticky wax out of the chain to the point that the chain loses its lubricity. I have no scientific evidence to back up MY claim.

I'd like to see some scientific evidence of that such as micro-photographic evidence of the chain links and rollers with no wax after, say, a 50 mile ride rather than the author's opinion on the matter. The author offers up no such evidence, or applicable expertise in this field to support the claim. Interesting argument though.

I do agree though that oil probably will not be able to be pushed out of a chain, and if it is, it probably will flow back into the guts again. There's probably no doubt about that.

The concept of using wax to lubricate a chain is NOT a new idea. Racers were doing that decades ago and chains last a LONG time when lubricated even with just straight paraffin.

The author's argument that a wet lube is better will not hold up for biking in a very dusty gritty environment. Try Arizona where the grit alone will wear a chain out fast if it is not lubed with a dry lubricant. A wet lube in Arizona is like adding sand to grease. It will definitely attract grit and prematurely wear the whole drive-train not just the chain. That is pretty much a solid fact for riders out there. I know, I used to be one.

I've read that article and it's mostly bogus. Start with the durability of the his chains. He has a population of 2 which makes it hard to draw the kind of conclusion that he draws. He thinks there is a huge differences in getting 3500 miles vs 3200 miles. There isn't. I have no idea what the variability of chain wear is but it is likely to be a rather large number. I could see it as easily being 300 miles. I use dry lubricant exclusively and get about 3500 miles of wear out of my chain. I don't see how using oil is any better.

As for the wax getting "squeezed out of the chain", it isn't. The wax may be squeezed out from between the pins of the chain and the plates but so is the oil. The difference is that the wax is contained inside the rollers while the oil can be inside the rollers but just as easily be outside the rollers as well. Yes, the oil is less viscous and can flow more but it can just as easily...and more readily...flow out of the chain. The author states that he wipes the chain down with wipes which means that he is physically removing the oil that has flowed out of the chain. Oil that has been removed can't "flow back" into the chain.

I would suggest that to make this "The Last Word on Chain Lubrication", he'll have to run his tests on a few more chains than 2. When he runs his tests on a statistically significant number of chains...which is far more than 2...perhaps he'll have a right to claim that this is the last word but until then, he's got nothin'

Chain care, wear and skipping by Jobst Brandt


I remove my chains and clean them in an ultrasonic cleaner every 800 to 900 miles. I use chain saw bar oil thinned with mineral spirits. My chains have lasted over 16000 miles using this method.

Years ago I read an article in the now long defunct, much missed "Bicycle Guide" magazine by John Barnett of the Manitou Springs based Barnett Bicycle Institute. He tested a bunch of lubes to see which one attracted the least amount of dirt/grit. His premise was that most lubes do a decent job of lubricating and the deciding factor in chain wear was how much dirt/grit the lube attracted. (It's not really relevant to this discussion but the winner was Super Lube teflon lube).

I used to use a product called "Chain Wax" which consisted of a can of "wax" (probably with additives) which you heated until it was liquid into which you then immersed the chain. Worked like a charm - the chain was dead quiet and it lasted a "reasonable length of time" (can't really say how many miles). When the chain started getting a bit noisy I would repeat the process. Don't know why I stopped using it (well actually I do - I used to like trying new products just for fun!).