Originally Posted by rosefarts (Post 23504897)

The road is 10 speed, probably KMC.

The MTB is SRAM XX1 in gold, to match my pedals.

The gravel is the Campy C13 Ekar chain.

I just pulled off the gravel chain to wax and it sure seemed really waxy. Maybe my pulleys or pedals are squeaking but I doubt it.

Originally Posted by Dave Mayer (Post 23508082)

So how much is my chain life going to be extended by waxing? Assume my and your time is worth $100 per hour, someone do the math to convince me. If your time is not worth $100/hour, then I suggest you switch employment, and then you can afford more chains, and even leave all tedious messy maintenance to someone else, such as a shop.


BTW: my corporate lawyers charge out at $500/hour. Time is of the essence indeed.

Originally Posted by Dave Mayer (Post 23508082)

If you've read a complex legal contract, a seemingly throwaway but profound clause is often inserted: "Time is of the essence". Indeed, time is the only scarcity in life. Time can be converted to money, fitness, wisdom, descendants, pleasure, etc.


So all of this tedious debate about chain waxing gets down to how much time is involved in waxing vs. liquid-lubing a chain, and the relative benefits therein. Actually, most of the visitors to our local bike Co-op never lubricate their chains at all, so there is that option as well.


I think we've established above that there is no measurable on-bike energy savings (as in watts) due to chain maintenance. Or reported by a reliable competent entity that doesn't have some snake-oil to sell.


So we're down to chain life... how much could waxing your chain extend your chain life, versus the cost of replacing your chain? My regime is wiping the chain down with a rag (never water anywhere on a bike), followed by some bulk petroleum-based lube purchased for $5 for a pint. Then wipe the excess off with a rag. So 5 minutes max., maybe once per week. My chains cost roughly $20 each, and are replaced 3x per year, due to riding 300 days per year.


So how much is my chain life going to be extended by waxing? Assume my and your time is worth $100 per hour, someone do the math to convince me. If your time is not worth $100/hour, then I suggest you switch employment, and then you can afford more chains, and even leave all tedious messy maintenance to someone else, such as a shop.


BTW: my corporate lawyers charge out at $500/hour. Time is of the essence indeed.

Originally Posted by Dave Mayer (Post 23508089)

Follow-up question: I've been looking at the chemistry of basic mineral oil, as found in my local pharmacy at $5 per pint. It would seemingly be a good chain lube. Of course it lacks trendy dyes and scents, and it is not in the rad & bad bike industry packaging that causes the price to jump 10-fold, but the chemistry seems to work.

Someone with some real chemistry knowledge, convince me otherwise.

Originally Posted by rosefarts (Post 23508291)

I don’t care about extending the life of my chains, they last long enough. That’s not in the equation.

Its cleanliness.

.

Originally Posted by Dave Mayer (Post 23508082)

If you've read a complex legal contract, a seemingly throwaway but profound clause is often inserted: "Time is of the essence". Indeed, time is the only scarcity in life. Time can be converted to money, fitness, wisdom, descendants, pleasure, etc.


So all of this tedious debate about chain waxing gets down to how much time is involved in waxing vs. liquid-lubing a chain, and the relative benefits therein. Actually, most of the visitors to our local bike Co-op never lubricate their chains at all, so there is that option as well.


I think we've established above that there is no measurable on-bike energy savings (as in watts) due to chain maintenance. Or reported by a reliable competent entity that doesn't have some snake-oil to sell.


So we're down to chain life... how much could waxing your chain extend your chain life, versus the cost of replacing your chain? My regime is wiping the chain down with a rag (never water anywhere on a bike), followed by some bulk petroleum-based lube purchased for $5 for a pint. Then wipe the excess off with a rag. So 5 minutes max., maybe once per week. My chains cost roughly $20 each, and are replaced 3x per year, due to riding 300 days per year.


So how much is my chain life going to be extended by waxing? Assume my and your time is worth $100 per hour, someone do the math to convince me. If your time is not worth $100/hour, then I suggest you switch employment, and then you can afford more chains, and even leave all tedious messy maintenance to someone else, such as a shop.


BTW: my corporate lawyers charge out at $500/hour. Time is of the essence indeed.

Originally Posted by cyccommute (Post 23508327)

As I’ve stated above, I use solvent wax…aka drip wax.

Originally Posted by D00M (Post 23508422)

I read on other online forum that drip wax (like Squirt) is not as clean as hot wax.

Question: Does drip wax collect more dust/dirt than hot wax? Or is there any brand dependence? Or both drip wax and hot wax are way cleaner than oil/grease, so any minor difference is not significant?

Originally Posted by cyccommute (Post 23507998)

It be clear, I’m not arguing that wax…or any lubricant for that matter…never penetrates into the plate/pin interface. Of course it does. However, once the chain starts being put under tension, any lubricant is going to be forced out of the interface. In the case of oil, as soon as the pressure is released the oil can flow back into the interface. This might happen as often as the chain roller transferring from one tooth on a cog or chainwheel. Oil might even flow back in under a vacuum. As the tension is released, the interface could cause a cavitation which would suck the oil back in. The mechanism really isn’t that important, however. Only the fact that the oil flows out and flows back.

Wax, on the other hand, is a plastic solid. Pressure at the interface can only push the wax out. It cannot flow. There is simply no evidence that there could be any kind of “melting” of the wax to have it flow back.



It doesn’t matter what the movement of the chain is. The wax is what moves and it is too plastic to resist movement under pressure. If it were brittle like a crystalline material it would stay in place and resist being pushed out but wax is essentially amorphous and has little structure to prevent flow under pressure. Think of how you can deform wax with a finger nail or even how you could displace a tiny amount with pressure from your finger. There also is nothing in the chain to prevent movement of the wax in any direction. Wax that is trapped at the pin/plate interface can easily be squeezed into the gap between the plates or into the roller. Wax in the roller itself is also going to be lost by being pushed out of the roller by pressure. It will be a smaller amount of movement because the roller isn’t under much pressure but wax will eventually be lost to the outside of the chain over time.



If a chain had higher friction and a source of heat, I could possibly see how the wax might melt. But the evidence against the idea of wax melting is large.

• ​​​​​​​Chains are stone cold even after hours of use so there’s not heat to work with.
• Johns Hopkins showed that there is almost no friction even when the chain has no lubricant.
• Waxed chains wear out at about the same rate as oiled chains without the grinding grit that eventually contaminates the oil.
• Wax doesn’t flow in contact with cold metal.
• Wax doesn’t last forever which would be expected is some micro quantity of wax were being melted and moved back into the contact point. There is a comparatively infinite reservoir of wax in each roller.
• Waxed chains start to make noise after being exposed to water but wax is not water soluble so there’s noise comes from water exposure of bare metal.

There is also the example of skaters presented above. Heat in the tracks of the skate can be measured. Ice is being melted in that contact point. The temperature is raised only a few degrees…maybe 10°F…and it still leaves a trace on the ice. Melting wax…even a tiny amount…would require a temperature rise of 60° to 80° F. It would leave a mark…i.e. the heat would be evident.

I can propose a mechanism for how the wax could be refreshed in the pin/plate interface. There is wax inside the roller. Immersion would completely fill the gap. As the chain moves around some small amount of that wax could shear off and fall into the pin/plate interface. It could than be pulled into the interface through the movement of the chain. It wouldn’t be a lot and it would be a random process. It’s also far more believable than melting wax with some invisible heat process.

Originally Posted by Duragrouch (Post 23508476)

I agree with most of the above, it lines up with my theory as well. However, I was going to argue that perhaps wax is amorphous so moves slowly over time like I think some glasses, but nope, I looked it up, wax is crystalline as well as micro-crystalline, at least pure paraffin wax, which is what I use to wax chains, and it's hard and pretty brittle when stressed while not contained on all sides. The wax on the outside of the chain flakes off really fast. The wax between the pin, inner plate holes, and sideplates, is contained and thus pretty durable. Add softening agents to the wax, and the above is no longer true.

Originally Posted by cyccommute (Post 23508327)

As I’ve stated above, I use solvent wax…aka drip wax. I use it because it is a superior product in one aspect only. It is clean. I can handle my chain in a white suit if I wanted and know that I wouldn’t have to worry about oil stains. It isn’t superior in terms of lubricity (nor inferior). It isn’t superior in terms of chain longevity (nor inferior). It isn’t superior in terms of intervals between lubrication (nor inferior). It is superior in terms of the lack of need to constantly clean my drive train.

Hot wax is too fiddly and isn’t any better than solvent wax…I used to hot wax. Oil is far too dirty and if I really feel the need to get oily dirt under my fingernails and trapped in my crackly skin, I know that I’ll get all the oily dirt I need at my 2 days of work at local co-ops. I mean who doesn’t look forward to drivetrains that look like this

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...833be4496.jpeg
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...4956c1d9c.jpeg

You can see the oil on the brake arms and not shown are the oil drenched shifters. This was a donation and I think the person just opened a can of motor oil and poured it on from front to back.



As a chemist and as I’ve stated above, there is probably nothing wrong with whatever you want to use as a lubricant. I’m not sure that a vegetable based oil is a good choice…it has some oxidation properties that have some downsides…but just about anything else you want to use will work and won’t damage the drivetrain. Pharmaceutical mineral has a low viscosity so expect to see your bike look like the example above in this post and, perhaps, more frequent application but it won’t hurt the drivetrain. The oils used in bicycle chain lubes are a higher viscosity so they stick on a little better.

I would suggest trying a drip wax. You’ll be amazed at the amount of time you’ll save by not cleaning your bike. If you really need to deal with dirty bikes, I’ll bet you can find a co-op where you’ll deal with the filthiest bikes around.

Originally Posted by phughes (Post 23508755)

Not denying chain wax is cleaner, nor that it doesn't work, but what you have pictured has nothing to do with the type of lube used, but instead the amount and complete lack of care. Bad example. Mine have never looked like that, mountain bike, touring bike used on the C&O during a hurricane, etc. What you show in the picture is the picture equivalent of hyperbole.

Originally Posted by cyccommute (Post 23508688)

While wax molecules will self arrange in an order pattern that is the definition of “crystalline”, the order isn’t like what occurs in ionic crystalline materials. Sodium chloride, for example, is an ordered 3 dimensional pattern from top to bottom with each atom in the structure connected in a highly rigid structure that resists any kind of deformation unless the material is melted or dissolved.

Wax has a lower order of “crystallinity”. The molecules lay down next to each other but there is very little molecule to molecule interaction. The result is a material that is not as brittle as a mineral crystalline structure and more plastic. Once melted, the crystallinity goes away as would any crystalline structure. Crystallization is a process that requires somewhat specific conditions. Rapid cooling is not conducive to crystal structure formation. Chains are removed from the melt and rapidly cooled which would result in a far less ordered material. If not completely amorphous, the wax on the chain is going to be less ordered than the wax in the pot which is allowed to cool more slowly.

I agree that the material trapped in the rollers is going to be there until the next time the chain is heated, although there would be some losses as the chain is used. The chain isn’t sealed and some of the wax is going to be pushed out during use. This would be the source of material for my proposed mechanism of getting some wax into the pin/plate interface.

Microcrystalline wax is more elastic than paraffin wax. It is added to paraffin to change the properties and make it more flexible and/or moldable.. It has more branching on the molecule than paraffin which is usually a straight chain wax.

Originally Posted by cyccommute (Post 23508953)

In 15+ years of working on bikes at co-ops, this is perhaps the most extreme example but it is not an isolated incidence. I’ve seen others that were almost as bad including, I kid you not, someone who oiled their disc brakes because they were squealing. People do lots of dumb things with bikes.

I do spend nearly a week trying to get the oil out of the crags in my fingers. This picture was taken on Tuesday and is from last Thursday

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...bcd92fd1f.jpeg

My fingers are almost always stained with oil. I feel like a smoker at times.

Originally Posted by phughes (Post 23509742)

And that is my point. It is an extreme example, and has nothing to do with the merits of using oil, or wax.

Originally Posted by Kontact (Post 23509787)

The most disgusting chain lubricant is Boeshield.

Originally Posted by cyccommute (Post 23509772)

It has everything to do with the merits of using oil. I seldom see a waxed chain in the co-op but I see lots and lots and lots of oiled chains that leave my filthy after every shift. Some people may be able to oil chains in a manner that is clean but I seldom see it. I even have special clothes that I wear at the co-op because I can’t get the grease and grim out of them.

Originally Posted by phughes (Post 23509864)

No it doesn't. I still use oil, and mine has never looked like that. It is not difficult to keep a chain clean. A quick wipe of the chain is all that is needed, and not over-oiling is key.

Originally Posted by phughes (Post 23509864)

No it doesn't. I still use oil, and mine has never looked like that. It is not difficult to keep a chain clean. A quick wipe of the chain is all that is needed, and not over-oiling is key.

Originally Posted by cyccommute (Post 23509876)

It may not be difficult to keep an oil clean but very few people do it. And no matter how much you wipe the chain to remove the oil on the outside oil flows as I have been pointing out for many pages now. You may wipe your chain all the time but most people don’t. I’ve been doing repairs of people’s bikes for more than 15 years now and I’ve worked on north of 15,000 bikes. The vast majority of chains are oiled and they are messy.

I never wipe my chain. Don’t need to. I don’t need to clean my ever. Nor my drivetrain. Nor do I need to scrub grease off my legs all the time.

Originally Posted by Kontact (Post 23509871)

At the bike shop, we would over-oil the chain and then wipe, wipe, wipe. Customers were always delighted how much that cleaned up their chain but it left no residue. And was quiet.

Originally Posted by Dave Mayer (Post 23508082)

Assume my and your time is worth $100 per hour, someone do the math to convince me. If your time is not worth $100/hour, then I suggest you switch employment, and then you can afford more chains, and even leave all tedious messy maintenance to someone else, such as a shop.

Originally Posted by cyccommute (Post 23507998)