mtb chain lube 60km race or more

[Showtime]

Not at all, but it seems you had some interesting things to say about it in the "Great Lube Debate of 2012" I read most of this and remembered your name popping up with some longs posts

http://www.thehubsa....tb/page__st__64

 

I just read some of it quick and it was some of the most constructive contributions ever on thehub so I think the man is qualified to debate this subject.

[GoLefty!!]

From jadeg's post on page 2.

"You can download some free results of the tests they have done, they have shown that parafin wax is the best in terms of least amount of watts in both efficiency and longevity results "

 

 

I find this statement to be very hard to believe. Paraffinic waxes are not very good lubricants. They are very good carriers for oil and additives but that's about it.

paraffinic waxes also are not great are compressive loads as they tend to break down quicker than others. In HRFF (high frequency reciprocating rig) tests, more aromatic base oils (naphthenic) tend to show higher levels of lubricity which means lower wear and greater energy saving. This all needs to be viewed in context of course since we're talking about a bicycle chain lube not a food grate pulling 500kg of frozen chickens up a 45degree slope at depressed temperatures or carrying 500degree C plastic steel to the drop forger or tubing dies.

No we're talking about the humble bicycle chain but somehow there's always someone who spots a gap and does something that looks impressive but somehow seems to miss the point and the point here is that paraffin wax is NOT good at either of the conclusions they are drawing. Yeah its great is some food processing applications and is probably adequate for our lightly loaded bicycle chain but I am highly sceptical that paraffin wax is the best lube. It sounds impressive to make that conclusion. It does have advantages in sealing the chain but other than that there's no real benefit.

 

Now I'm not sure what little stirrer's (rouxtjie) problem is other than o add noise to the discussion, but no I don't sell bicycle chain oil, nor do I blend any, although one bicycle shop has asked me too and another would like talk further about lube oils and whats best for their needs. I do have extensive experience in the area of tribology and have developed engine oils, hydraulic oils, gearbox oils, cv-joint greases and motorcycle oils for passenger cars, competition cars and motorcycles respectively, including chain lubes for the latter. I know this doesn't qualify me to speak in your esteemed company on the internet but I thought I'd share my carefully considered opinion anyway....

[rouxtjie]

From jadeg's post on page 2.

"You can download some free results of the tests they have done, they have shown that parafin wax is the best in terms of least amount of watts in both efficiency and longevity results "

 

 

I find this statement to be very hard to believe. Paraffinic waxes are not very good lubricants. They are very good carriers for oil and additives but that's about it.

paraffinic waxes also are not great are compressive loads as they tend to break down quicker than others. In HRFF (high frequency reciprocating rig) tests, more aromatic base oils (naphthenic) tend to show higher levels of lubricity which means lower wear and greater energy saving. This all needs to be viewed in context of course since we're talking about a bicycle chain lube not a food grate pulling 500kg of frozen chickens up a 45degree slope at depressed temperatures or carrying 500degree C plastic steel to the drop forger or tubing dies.

No we're talking about the humble bicycle chain but somehow there's always someone who spots a gap and does something that looks impressive but somehow seems to miss the point and the point here is that paraffin wax is NOT good at either of the conclusions they are drawing. Yeah its great is some food processing applications and is probably adequate for our lightly loaded bicycle chain but I am highly sceptical that paraffin wax is the best lube. It sounds impressive to make that conclusion. It does have advantages in sealing the chain but other than that there's no real benefit.

 

Now I'm not sure what little stirrer's (rouxtjie) problem is other than o add noise to the discussion, but no I don't sell bicycle chain oil, nor do I blend any, although one bicycle shop has asked me too and another would like talk further about lube oils and whats best for their needs. I do have extensive experience in the area of tribology and have developed engine oils, hydraulic oils, gearbox oils, cv-joint greases and motorcycle oils for passenger cars, competition cars and motorcycles respectively, including chain lubes for the latter. I know this doesn't qualify me to speak in your esteemed company on the internet but I thought I'd share my carefully considered opinion anyway....

My problem as you put it, is that you throw big words in the mix and now we must take your word as gospel....On paper and in labs sure it makes sense, but we don't ride bikes on paper now do we?

 

Here is my game though, I build data warehouses for a living, hence my obsession for data(its a curse). With little effort I capture every single ride, conditions I rode in as well as track component life through my garmin edge 500 and sporttracks plugins. None of the lubes I have used....squirt, pedros synth, finishline green, epic ride, motorex, Muc-off, purple extreme, boshield T-9 or rock & roll extreme extended the life of chains or drive train more or less than 100km. The numbers don't lie I am afraid. Some last longer than other though(ito having to re-apply on a ride) and some make more of a mess than others. However as far as longevity results go...I call BS on oil based lubes outperforming the others.

 

Like they say in the classics, at the end of the day, it is the scoreboard that counts.

[GoLefty!!]

Thats my point. The article makes mention of power saving. If you consider power saving to be reduced friction then sure that means less wear and a longer drivetrain life.

You're not seeing that in your data are you?

 

So how valid is the articles conclusions and what is the agenda?

 

IMO, the conclusions are just interesting reading until the actual test conditions are very clear. The article bows to the power fad and the moment people see WATTS they go all cross eyed and on to it like dogs in heat.

The power savings are 2.4%, just over 1% of the that is chain type and lube. How many tests, what was the repeatability of the tests. Is the test reproducable? Those are TRUTHS that interest me, hence I conclude the article's agenda is too support a business of selling a power saving. If anyone's tried buying into renewable energies like solar water heaters you know that those saving just don't materialise in the real world.

Also, the power saving is for a completely clean chain. How is the dirt introduced?

 

The big elephant in the room with that constant load test is just that, CONSTANT LOAD. Nobody pedals a bicycle by applying a constant load to the pedals. Your load is varying through the pedal stroke. That allows the chain links to change distance relative to each other constantly as the chain loads and unloads. This allows dirt to be pumped into the chain. Does the test replicate that? Nope.

 

All I see is an attempt to over complicate a simple problem of chain lube and create a product from it. Kudo's to the guy who did it but it does not impress me and I won't get sucked into the hype around a 2.4% power saving under ideal conditions.

 

AS I said in the previous thread on this matter, I'm loathe to spend R150 for 50ml of camel urine. Now the product is taken a step further in that I can now buy a carefully prepared chain and matching jockey wheel set at a premium to save 2.4% on a dry day in cape Town with no wind after the roads have been swept and the construction trucks have broken down..

 

There will always be those who jump on the next fad. I see it as them trying to show everyone how much money they have.

DOn't get me wrong, I don't dispute the benefits of paraffin wax lubes. Paraffin wax has fantastic properties, as long as it's very pure. The higher the purity, the better the properties.

Naphthenic oils don't have much wax so their temperature performance is going to be less than ideal but I've yet to find a cyclist who rides at 40 degrees C or 100 degrees C....

 

In terms of lubricity, paraffin waxes CAN be better, as log as it's very pure. Theres no many places in the world where paraffin wax is as pure as the stuff they make at Secunda. So if you want a Paraffin wax lube, Squirt gets my vote.

Motorcycle lubes have a nice mix of paraffin wax and naphthenic oil (best of both worlds) + additives.

 

Finishline Wet lube (the green stuff) is a nice blend of naphthenic and paraffinic il, hence it has such good lubricity./ Best of all, its cheaper than wax only stuff.

 

I had a debate with Johan Bornman on this some time ago and I went away to do some homework, even using our companies lab. He maintained that the best lube is the stuff that comes on the chain when its still in the wrapper. I hated that stuf because it attracted so much dirt and was sticky. I emailed my contacts at a big groupset company in the Netherlands and asked them what it was but they didn't know. "We buy it from you guys" was all he said...

So I tested it and low and behold its a motorcycle chain lube. Obviously applied at the factory with an applicator but essentially its the same stuff just thinned down with a bit of solvent. Later after I tracked down the sale people looking after that account they varified it was a chain lube.

Now Johan maintains that is the best stuff and I tend to agree with him. Paraffin wax, in a naphthenic oil applied via aerosol to allow it too penetrate.

 

Some of my pals have had good results with soaking a chain in white lightning over night before fitting it. Problem is what to do once the wax is out of the chain as it won't go back in. There is just nothing strong enough to flush the old wax out. This is where a nice thick (high viscosity ) wet lube comes in.

 

Point is, there is no right answer, there is no way to keep wax in the chain and your chain will see a depreciating performance over time. That is a fact.

 

The best practise is the simply wipe off the sticky lube on the outside of a brand new chain, fit the thing and go ride. When you need to top up the chain lube use a wet lube like Finishline with a dual base oil mix. Eventually you will hav squeezed all the wax out and you're going to need to replace the lube. I simply top it up with engine oil or Finish line as there is no way to relube it with wax unless you can get the chain hot. Some have told me they heat up their lube before applying it. I think that's dangerous (Solvent fumes are flammable and can be toxic).

 

Paying a premium for a 2.4% power saving................... well I guess everyone is selling something and there's a market for everything

 

 

 

PS: Sorry for the length.

Edited July 30, 2013 by GoLefty!!

[schizo]

Thanks for a great post Lefty, I used the friction fact report to give me an idea if my current lube was any good, which was the White lightning, Epic Ride, Based on the testing they did (As you said doesn't take all factors into consideration and I understand that) it was the worse, So I decided to change to Finish line which you are saying is good and in there results both wet and dry come in the top 10. Maybe you should get together with the friction fact guys and improve there testing

 

Another question, Would it make sense to do this, Lube every 50 to 100km's dependent on conditions and use a degreaser or paraffin to clean the chain every 500km's? Or is this going to open another can of worms?

[Goodbadugly]

A light chainsaw oil...

I use 80w90 gearbox oil

[Firozfx]

I use 80w90 gearbox oil

 

Same. But mission to keep clean

[GoLefty!!]

Thanks for a great post Lefty, I used the friction fact report to give me an idea if my current lube was any good, which was the White lightning, Epic Ride, Based on the testing they did (As you said doesn't take all factors into consideration and I understand that) it was the worse, So I decided to change to Finish line which you are saying is good and in there results both wet and dry come in the top 10. Maybe you should get together with the friction fact guys and improve there testing

 

Another question, Would it make sense to do this, Lube every 50 to 100km's dependent on conditions and use a degreaser or paraffin to clean the chain every 500km's? Or is this going to open another can of worms?

 

 

Jirrre ja degreaser is another can of worms. Paraffin (illumintaing Kerosene is a good degreaser. It's used as a component in industrial degreasers thanks to it being more miscible with water through additives.

I clean the clean when ever is needs a good cleaning. On the Mtb that could be after every ride or it could be once a week of once a month. Depends more on conditions.

Lube on demand as well.

 

I'm not sure Friction fact would be open to changing their testing since they developed their rig as a tool to market their Energy conservation proposition to cyclist. It could have been cheaper to develop this test than invest in a HFRR (ISO 12156-1) or BOCLE (ASTM D5001-10) test rigs.

I always raise an eyebrow if a non industry test is used because it means the integrity of the test is not established..

 

Let me tell you that if an F1 engine manufacturer could find 2.4% energy saving in a lubricant they would be all over it like a bad rash. I don;t consider any of the Chain oils on the market to be poor. The big problem comes down to how it was applied and I consider a solvent carried wax to be a poor applicator

[schizo]

Jirrre ja degreaser is another can of worms. Paraffin (illumintaing Kerosene is a good degreaser. It's used as a component in industrial degreasers thanks to it being more miscible with water through additives.

I clean the clean when ever is needs a good cleaning. On the Mtb that could be after every ride or it could be once a week of once a month. Depends more on conditions.

Lube on demand as well.

 

I'm not sure Friction fact would be open to changing their testing since they developed their rig as a tool to market their Energy conservation proposition to cyclist. It could have been cheaper to develop this test than invest in a HFRR (ISO 12156-1) or BOCLE (ASTM D5001-10) test rigs.

I always raise an eyebrow if a non industry test is used because it means the integrity of the test is not established..

 

Let me tell you that if an F1 engine manufacturer could find 2.4% energy saving in a lubricant they would be all over it like a bad rash. I don;t consider any of the Chain oils on the market to be poor. The big problem comes down to how it was applied and I consider a solvent carried wax to be a poor applicator

So to confirm the solvent carried wax would be like the epic ride lube?

[ChUkKy]

So to confirm the solvent carried wax would be like the epic ride lube?

 

Squirt as well

[Heel Drop]

 

To be honest...no improved life in drivetrain no matter which lube I used...oil(motorex, finishline green, pedro's synth lube), wax(squirt, Boshield T-9) or teflon(rock and roll extreme). All have been measured through various seasons and chain, cassette and chainring wear are within 100km of each other. So if there was any benefit to using one particular type I would have known about it....I track wear and tear on my components through sporttracks.

 

So the other factors that influence what I buy is longevity and cleanliness. Here R&R extreme shines....it lasted every single day at j2c without the chain moaning once...so I didn't have to re-apply at waterpoints, I just kept on going and its a breeze to clean(you just re-apply...you do you use quite a bit though, and wipe chain as clean as possible)...no caking and paste in jockey wheels or cassette....the guys with squirt started vloeking at sterkfontein dam.

where can u get r an r extreme - sorry if it mentioned

[GoLefty!!]

Squirt is actually ore of an emulsion lube than a solvent carried lube by definition but the end result is the same. I think they are using de-ionised water because it carries the lube longer before evaporating.

[rouxtjie]

where can u get r an r extreme - sorry if it mentioned

Epic cycles in you area, bought some there before