SoSmellyAir

Really? You are supposed to dip the slightly dirty chain directly into the wax?

I have two waxed Shimano chains on two separate bikes. With one chain I started waxing about after riding 300 miles on the Shimano factory grease. With the other I started waxing when it was brand new. Both get dirty, but nowhere near as bad as using lube. So I always put the chain through two OMS baths, and dry thoroughly, before waxing.

seypat

Does anyone do the Hokey Pokey to pass the time while the wax/chains are simmering away?

tomato coupe

Sorry, my mistake. My stated experience cleaning cassettes and pulleys is the same as what you describe above for normally (wet) lubed chains, because mine is also for normally lubed chains. I don't swap my chains and clean them ultrasonically, so I can't say definitively how often cassettes and pulleys need to be cleaned when swapped and cleaned ultrasonically.

I'm going to disagree with that. I think the "cost" of waxing and keeping a "fastidiously clean" non-waxed chain is basically the same:

1) The recurring labor cost of swapping & cleaning is the same, if the chains are swapped at the same intervals. 300 km is a typical interval recommended by wax manufacturers but, if 500 km works for you, then we can use 500 km as our interval. So, every 500 km, you perform the same basic labor in the two cases.

2) A fastidiously clean non-waxed chain will probably require no more cassette or pulley cleaning than a waxed chain. In the worst case, it may require a yearly cleaning of the cassette. But, the labor cost of that yearly cleaning is small -- one can simply toss the cassette into the ultrasonic cleaner after cleaning a batch of chains.

3) Equipment costs are very close. Waxers need a crockpot, but non-waxers do not. A non-waxer needs an ultrasonic cleaner, but a serious waxer would also probably have one for initial chain cleanings. (In either case, you could use always a soda bottle filled with solvent instead.) So, the ultrasonic cleaner is either a wash or a small ($50-$60) added expense for a non-waxer, and the crockpot is a small ($12) added expense for the waxer.

Polaris OBark

That's what I do. The liquid paraffin itself works fine to clean the chain.

My rides are in dry, dusty conditions (drought-stricken santa crud moon-dust). Your conditions might be different.

terrymorse 

It puts the chain in the crock pot, or it gets the hose.

yaw

The conversation breaker is that "I've been greasing my chain with pig fat for 50 years and wiping it down with my sleeve cleans it perfectly and it takes me 10 seconds a month tops" is not a valid response to a method that claims to achieve the lowest friction/wear and sustained objective cleanliness in a long-term time efficient manner.

Facts remain

• Waxed chains are faster, and so clean that they are faster for longer.
• As a result, waxed chains also extend parts longevity significantly.
• Once set up, it is easy, very low maintenance though lack of cleaning requirements, and overall time efficient

One really has to ignore controlled test results, anecdotal evidence, and logic, with a good helping of shortsighted selectivity regarding the initial setup and ongoing process.

It's bs to compare some quick external chain wipe and relube practice with a much cleaner system that would take frequent labour intensive solvent degreasing to match. It is myopic to pick on a one-off setup process that pales into insignificance given the long-term minimal maintenance requirement. It is ignorant to fail to see that the initial equipment expense provides an overwhelming return on investment compared to drip-on methods. Nobody here could suggest a chain treatment suggestion that is objectively cleaner, kinder on the drivetrain, or takes less overall time across the chain lifespan when held to the same standard of maintained drivetrain cleanliness over time.

If you are comfortable with less performance, that is fine, but that's rarely acknowledged. It is out of the question that not everyone wants these benefits enough to change their ways, but the point is rather that it is experientially such a valuable practice for those riders that care about these benefits that it just seems like a topic that should be more talked about (being mentioned in this forum once or twice a year and only in few circles offline still means it is reasonably fringe versus all the established lube bottles and degreasers in every store), better understood by riders and workshops (critical misunderstandings are all over this thread), instead of being an option that many riders can be oblivious of for a very long time, despite perhaps being interested.

The people who come in here claiming that others want to impart their ways and don't understand that it's just 'not for them' may consider that the point is not to convert them if they don't want to try it, and that spitting out some unrelated anecdotes of how their routine, entirely incomparable in terms of the measurable results, or disbelief regarding claims that have been backed up, is simply off topic.

tomato coupe

Ftfy

Trakhak

Same, except that instead of filling it with Simple Green, I drip a few drops of Triflow into the tiny holes provided at the top of the chain cleaning gizmo. The Triflow cleans the chain quite nicely. And lubes it at the same time, of course. Less than 5 minutes, and I'm done.

The only time I remove a chain is when I replace it when it has worn out. My chains last a very long time.

If you're someone who likes to rotate your bike tires by discarding the rear when it wears out, moving the front to the rear, and installing a new front tire, then you're likely a candidate for chain waxing. I prefer to replace the worn rear tire, then replace both tires next time, then replace the rear tire, etc., thus eliminating unnecessary work.

I wonder how many motorcyclists wax their chains.

Branko D

The best of drip lubes (invariably, wax based) offer only marginally worse results with a routine which is, essentially, once per week, wheel the bike to the living room, wipe drivetrain (and rest of bike, while at it - I like it clean), a drop of it on every link and that's it. Ready to ride in the morning. That's the allure of them.

The new Ceramicspeed UFO lube which I've been using for nearly a year now is supposed to be roughly on par with their own wax. Of course if you run something dire as a lubricant, then the losses are significant compared to wax and durability is much less. ​​​​​​

Once every couple of months, when I have nothing better to do, or I just want to fiddle with something to relax, or I have some big event upcoming, I'll do a proper clean of bike plus drivetrain, maybe check the pads and replace if worn, replace the cables if they've done a lot of miles, maybe add a bit of tubeless sealant and do other minor (or major if something is amiss) maintenance.
​​​
​
​​

GhostRider62

You only use solvents to clean off the factory grease.

Just dump the chain into a crockpot with either silca or molten speed wax.

Very simple and FAR, FAR, FAR less work than the old ways.

jad3675 

Zero. I've been riding motorcycles for 30 years and have never heard of waxing a chain until I started riding push bikes.
Modern MC chains have o or x rings and are riveted.
Heck, I lube my MC chains with WD40 (yes, I know it's not a lube).

Bogey Speedwell

Ok honestly not trying to complicate this thread or Hi Jack it but have a question for those advocates of waxing.

let’s say I have a “friend” who wants to wax his chain and currently has a wax crockpot and blocks of Paraffin wax, any issues with using that? Better options?

seypat

I put some of this on my forklift mast chains yesterday. We'll see how it goes.

https://www.wd40.com/products/spray-gel/

Mojo31

Good to go. Mix in some PTFE and Bobs your uncle.

big john

omfg

Maelochs

Well .... anyone who doubts all this should do a web search for that Australian guy whop actually does the science---the guy actually tested dozens of different methods and has the results ... . you can also look at his much more useful (to me) video on how to best wax a chain, but if you doubt what @yaw posted, there is actual science---as in carefully controlled, repeated experiments---to back it up.

I am not saying waxing is better---it is for me, but that is just me---but I will say, some folks are unwilling to face facts. The conclusions we draw can differ, but we share a reality, and good science done in that shared reality yields valid, in not necessarily useful information.

Wax or not, I don't care .... but do real research before denying the results of said research. Don't be a Flat-Earther/anti-vaxxer/anti-recumbent conspiracy believer .....

or do, if you want.

I don't much care. I am going for a bike ride.

bampilot06

I waxed my chains once.

Polaris OBark

Or skip adding PTFE, do yourself, your lungs, your wallet and the planet a favor, and use pure paraffin.

WhyFi

a) goalposts moved [interval]
b) breaking a cold train is not the same amount of work as adding a drop of lube to each roller, spinning cranks and wiping afterwards.

"Probably no more"? Do it for a year and let me know, then - I *know* from experience and you're comparing to a hypothetical that I'm not sure I buy.

Come on. The ultrasonic cleaner is an additional expense. Recurring lube and solvent costs are also likely to be in favor of waxing.

Basically, you're doing a lot of hedging in the hopes of getting close enough to say that it's a wash.

Again - I don't care what you or anyone else does, but it should be very clear that waxing, as a whole, isn't an outlandish faff and it can even be a huge convenience for some.

tomato coupe

If you want to compare two methods, you need to use the same criteria. I originally chose 300 km because that is a typical recommended waxing interval. You said you use 500 km. We can either use 300 km or 500 km - it doesn't matter to me.
Both of those steps take very little time -- less than a minute for either -- once every 300/500 km. By any reasonable definition, that's a wash.
Unless you've swapped non-waxed chains every 300/500 km and cleaned them ultrasonically for a year, you're not speaking from experience either. Your experience is with traditional (wet) lubed chains that are rarely removed for cleaning.

Also, why would a "fastidiously clean" drivetrain require more cassette cleaning? It's fastidiously clean!
Every waxer I know uses an ultrasonic cleaner for initial cleaning of chains. But, neither a waxer nor non-waxer has to have one -- they can both use a soda bottle filled with solvent and agitate it by hand.
There's no hedging. The steps are basically the same, and the cost is very similar.
I didn't say waxing was outlandish, and I didn't say it wasn't convenient for some people. The discussion was whether there was a cost savings versus swapping out non-waxed chains at the same interval.

Polaris OBark

I don't use one, nor do I own one. (I have access to one at work, but have never felt the need).

No soda bottle filled with solvent either.

The only thing I use for an initial chain cleaning is a dry paper towel.

scottfsmith

I already mentioned it three times above but will try one more time: wax chains are not any better if you are riding in dry conditions. ZFC has data on that which I posted above. Here it is again:




So, you need to add a caveat to that blanket assertion.

If you read the details of the ZFC evaluations what he states is the top drip lubes should in fact do really well in wet conditions provided you re-apply after any wet ride. I figured this out the hard way, I got stuck in the rain once and didn't re-lube and the chain was very loud the next ride. So now I re-lube if I get stuck in the rain .. which happens about twice a year. So, even if you have an occasional wet ride you can still be comparable to hot wax with a quality drip lube.

Polaris OBark

Dry clean conditions, or dry dusty/sandy/gritty conditions? The latter is the main problem I am addressing.

scottfsmith

The header there is "dry contamination".. he is adding in abrasive dry contaminants at seven points during the test. See the full write-ups for details.

WhyFi

You said "if it's 300km, no additional steps were necessary," the implication being that longer interval would require more intervention (fair assessment),

I guess that I'm not being reasonable when I say that 20sec != 3 min. If you think it's the same, okay, but it's different to me.

Because wet lube. Oil doesn't just stay put nicely in the rollers - it always migrates out and grabs road grime. That crude does accumulate. You can forestall it by really frequent chain cleaning intervals, but it's going to be more work, one way or another.

I don't have an ultrasonic cleaner. I don't know any waxers that do. There's no drivetrain cleaning necessary other than the initial chain cleaning, which is once every 12-18 months, so I haven't felt the need. The only time I considered an ultrasonic cleaner was when I was still using wet lubes, because of my increased cleaning requirements (chain, cassette, jockeys). I wouldn't be surprised if the people that you know have them from their wet lube days.

In which case the time/effort saved tilts significantly towards waxing.

Basically, but more + basically, but more + basically, but more != the same

Okay. That's seems to be the general sentiment being tossed about, though.

I could possibly see frequent chain cleanings balancing out with the less frequent chain cleanings (and more frequent cassette/jockey/chainring cleanings), but I'm still not seeing the math add up favorably vs wax, not for me and in my reality, at least.