Six jours

One of my theories - feel free to smash it to hell, folks - is that waxing may work better for folks who don't ride too hard. I wonder if doing sprints and intervals puts more stress on the drivetrain, leading wax to break down sooner than it does for folks that are not pedaling as hard in their regular riding.

Rowan

Wax, when hard, flakes off the outside, and squeezes out from the inside. Unlike oil, which remains liquid, it doesn't seep back into the gaps between the metal.

Your theory probably has merit. It might have to do with power. Increase the power, increase the force between the rollers and pins of the chain, and you're forcing out the hardened wax.

For me, wax wouldn't cut it when doing long randonnees and touring.

TromboneAl

354 miles and still smooth and quiet. I really like having the chain stay clean.

zonatandem

Re-waxing chains (there's 2 on a tandem) every 3 to 4 thousand miles is not a big issue for us.
Been doing chain waxing since the mid-1970s.
It is clean, efficient and inexpensive; and best of all, it works great for us.

B. Carfree

If Rudy and Kay can live with wax on their tandem chains, then your theory loses support. Even at their relatively light team weight, they are still heavier than most clydes and I have been told that they were putting out some fairly serious power in their younger years.

It may well be that the more power one puts out the sooner the wax comes off the bearing surfaces of the chain, but we may not be able to generate enough power to make a difference. It's kind of like the more power you put out the sooner your handlebars will snap. It can happen, but it's pretty darn rare, even for tremendously powerful riders.

jim p

That bike is way to clean. There is not even any dust on it. My bike chain stays get covered with sand and grit just from riding down the pavement. Maybe I will wipe it down next spring.

OldsCOOL

All my roadies look like that because I take time to clean them. Yet, I still have my own (surprise surprise) recipe for chain care. Me? I use Marvel Mystery Oil (auto parts store product). It penetrates and cleans while lubricating. All I do is wipe the chain every 150-200mi and reapply once a month. And it is cheap....unlike "dedicated" (errrr, repackaged) bicycle products.

qcpmsame 

+1, do it as soon as I get home and shed the shoes, slap on some old running shoes and clear her up. Easier to maintain, comes from racing MX on motorcycles since 1972.

Bill

Six jours

That's all certainly possible, and I'm not married to the theory. But without meaning to question anyone's integrity, the claim of 3-4000 miles between waxings greatly exceeds anything I have ever heard from even the most ardent waxing supporter.

TromboneAl

I cleaned the frame with WD-40, then rode 61 miles on country roads and took the picture.

Steve Sawyer

I'm not an engineer, but I started looking at this problem from an analytical perspective.

In a chain drive, the rollers rotate on the link pins. If everything is clean and lubricated, they should not be rotating against the cogs or chainrings.
One end of the chain link plates also rotates on the link pins
In shifting, the chain link plates rub momentarily on the sides of the cog and chainring teeth

From this, it follows that the primary need for lubrication is on the link pins which will allow the rollers and link plates to rotate freely. Given the brief, momentary side-loading and contact between the chain plates and the cogs/chainsets during shifting, I'm not sure how much lubrication of the chain links themselves is needed. I'm thinking that whatever lubricant is used, if it were to be precisely applied using, say a needle-type applicator to each link pin, that this would be sufficient to the task.

If that is the case, then any lubricant ending up on the cogs or chainrings is unnecessary.

Feel free to poke holes in my line of reasoning here, but I'm thinking that the clean appearance of TromboneAl's drive components is not inconsistent with proper lubrication. Having used waxes for applications other than lubrication, I'd be inclined to mix some mineral oil with the melted paraffin, thus yielding a softer consistency (and therefore more inclined to remain in place around the link pins) to make the treatment a bit more long-lasting. I have a tub of a beeswax/mineral oil mixture that I'd be tempted to try.

TiHabanero

Years ago I experimented with a beeswax/paraffin/vegetable oil mixture for bearing lube. Used it in a headset because it made sense for the application. It worked quite well. I bet a similar concoction for the chain would work well, too.

qcpmsame 

Steve,
From what technical papers I have read about industrial chain lubrication you are pretty close in your analysis (end of big words.) The precise placing of a quality lubricant is the biggest thing in any lubricant working for a chain. Lube on the outside plates is a place for dirt and grit to attach and stick to the lubricant. Bel-Ray did some studies on lubrication on industrial chain systems and found that smaller amounts of the correct lubricant worked better and showed less wear on the plates, pins and rollers as they stayed cleaner. Dirt Bike riders and racers are notorious over lubricators and getting it through to not saturate the chain is nigh impossible to do. I had gone to BelRay's "clean" formula for my YZ-F until I had to stop racing a few years ago.

I believe, and this is just my thoughts, is that the lack of a tacky consistency on the paraffin is what makes it a fairly good chain lubricant in the low speed and stress conditions that a bicycle chain operates in. Your idea about the mineral oil may work but I'd worry about the paraffin not totally absorbing it into the mix. I have seem some lubricant "application systems" for sale that are nothing more than a hypodermic needle with a blunt needle, the straws do the same thing and they are free usually. You can inject an precise stream into the pins and rollers. For my bike I use Tri-Flow after thoroughly cleaning the chain and put the tip of the bottle down on the chain's rollers, not above it so that the lube runs over the plates. I make sure I wipe the chain down well afterwards. I have noticed less and less dirt and gunk on the chain and cogs/rings/ders with this method. Its what works for me, everyone should do what they think does the trick for their bike and its components. I don't try to sell lube or preach about a way to apply it.

Actually, I just want to go riding as often and as much as possible, my bike hasn't let me down so it is what works here in Barrineau Park, Florida, on a blue and orange Cannondale.

Bill

TiHabanero

Well, I did it. Created my first concoction for chain wax. Paraffin, beeswax and gun lube (doesn't get gummy like vegi oil). I think next bath will have more gun lube in it. Will let you know how it turns out after the first 100 miles.

zonatandem

Six Jours:
Chain waxing has worked for us.
Living 9 months out of the year in sunny/dry/windy Arizona and another 3 months 'somewhere up north' where it's cooler lets us easily put that kind of miles on our chains. An occasional/rare wipe with a rag in between waxings keeps off surface dust. Sunny/dry/windy/hot (100+ degrees) does create blowing dust and even dust devils ( a veritable mini tornado).
Lived also in Michigan (not dry, not sunny, cold) and used wax method; worked fine and still got thousands of miles between re-waxings.
After over 300,000 miles of bicycling (on tandems and singles) we still prefer the hot wax method.
Just our input/experience.

TiHabanero

Here is my impression at 100 miles. The drive train is really quiet, as in Phil Wood Tenacious Oil quiet. Wow! Shifting is a bit slower, but oddly it is more precise (Campy NR 6 speed, Suntour Barcons).
Won't know wear characteristics until serious mileage accumulates.
At first the crank turned slowly as it was stiff from the wax, but soon it was spinning like normal.
I like it. If I can get 200 miles between waxing I will stick with it.
Did I mention it is really, really quiet?

TromboneAl

I'm at 448 miles, everything good...

Six jours

Well, I may have to try it again...

StephenH

https://sheldonbrown.com/chainclean.html

There is more good information in that link than first appears.

My old technique: Dribble lube on chain while spinning it backwards, then run chain through paper towels. Result: Always dirty chain.

New technique: Dribble lube on inside surface of chain, then spin around a few times. Then hold chain in place, take a cheap disposable terrycloth washcloth, wipe chain back and forth several times until it is shiny, rotate chain a bit, and repeat. Works much better. The terrycloth is better for getting in between the sideplates and pins. Walmart sells washcloths at 20 for $5 or something like that, they're pretty cheap.

Steve Sawyer

Gotta ask - doesn't the WD40 leave an oily film?

Zinger

An oily film that will attract dirt if you use it on chains.

Rowan

WD40 is a favourite cleaner in a lot of bike shops. They buy it in bulk and use a spray bottle to apply it. It cuts through the grease and grime and smells nice.

Zinger

This should probably be discussed in the other thread on chain lube but since it was brought up in here......

Well this thread has inspired me to do some research on both WD40 and Starrett M1
just to see what's in them.

Here is a discussion on WD40 by a clock collectors forum

excerpted from the bottom of the page:

"The problem with WD-40 is that once the solvent evaporates it leaves behind a residual coating of grease"

(end of excerpt)

So I still am not sure what the differences are between M1 and WD40 but I have used both on bicycle chains and found WD40 to attract more dirt. It's entirely possible that a generic spray can of silicone might be better than both for lubing chains.

Using WD40 on micrometers is a no-no.

Steve Sawyer

So, if WD40 leaves a film that attracts dirt, why would you use it on your frame, and why was TromboneAl's frame clean as a whistle?

FWIW I too have used WD40 for cleaning off the frame as it does indeed seem to cut through the gunk, but then I wash it with soap & water to get the WD40 off. Trying to figure out why the wash step isn't necessary when logic tells me that my frame would be a mess without it.

Also (and back on track with the chain lubing thing) I completely removed my chain, went over the entire drive train with a degreaser, soaked the chain in degreaser then washed and rinsed everything until it was squeeky clean. As the fellow who descibed the wax & graphite approach pointed out, you'll NEVER get a used chain clean, but it was as good as I could get it. I then re-assembled everything and liberally applied a Teflon lube to the chain, wiping off the excess.

In the process I came to the conclusion that my drivetrain was collecting so much dirt because I think either the factory or my LBS used something like white lithium grease on the chain, chainrings and cogs. What a freakin' mess!! I'm glad I got all of that stuff out of the works. The chain seems a little noisy - not squeeky but if I listen for it, I can hear the soft "rattle" of the chain going through the derailleurs. Shifting is real good. I also got a nice chainring tatoo sometime yesterday, so there is still black crap oozing out of the chain. Depending on TromboneAl's experiment, I might give that a try when I put the bike up at the end of the season.

TromboneAl

Good question. I think that the WD40 just isn't sticky like chain lubes. I think of it more like mineral spirits. I go back and forth on what I clean the frame with -- sometimes I just use household cleaner. I like WD40 because I figure it protects some of the rustable parts, and it quickly gets the grunge off.

In the past I've hosed down the bike for cleaning, but now, I don't want to get the paraffin chain wet.

There's a restaurant in Brookings, OR that has model cars on display:



I once watched the waitress cleaning the cars -- she used WD40!

510 miles so far.