# Chain wax. Yes.



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

https://moltenspeedwax.com/


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Nooooooo.


----------



## jetdog9 (Jul 12, 2007)

Does this stuff mimic what's on the chain when it comes from factory? Brand new chains work great for a while and don't even really need lube with the way they come out of box nowadays, don't they?


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

Chain wax, No.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

jetdog9 said:


> Does this stuff mimic what's on the chain when it comes from factory? Brand new chains work great for a while and don't even really need lube with the way they come out of box nowadays, don't they?


Which chains?

KMC or Campag chains come coated in what feels like cosmolene

Shimano chains come coated fresh from what I believe is a fish oil factory

SRAM chains actually seem coated in actual chain lube. I mean WTF.


----------



## Finx (Oct 19, 2017)

I've been using Molten Speed Wax for a couple of years. I love it.

I tried going back to petroleum lubes, but I always go back to MSW.

The only exception is my rain bike which has some kind of generic lube on it. Of course I rarely ride this bike, so...

My road and gravel bikes get the hot wax bath every few hundred miles. I will occasionally use Squirt to extend the time between wax treatments, but it's leaves more residue behind so I use it sparingly and infrequently.

And no, wax bears no resemblance to the packing grease chains are shipped with.

Waxed chains are clean and dry. They don't pick up road grime, etc. It's why components tend to last so much longer than with sticky petroleum lubes.


----------



## bdaghisallo1 (Sep 25, 2007)

I tried MSWax and got rid of it after one ride. I followed the directions to the letter and started with two completely new and bare chains. Riding along it felt like there was sludge all over my chain and pedaling was noticeably harder than with normal lube.

I am back on NFS lube and loving it.


----------



## No Time Toulouse (Sep 7, 2016)

Wax seems to work best in dusty conditions, which is something I rarely encounter.


----------



## QuiQuaeQuod (Jan 24, 2003)

Wax has many good uses.

Chain lube ain't one.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Marc said:


> Which chains?
> 
> KMC or Campag chains come coated in what feels like cosmolene
> 
> ...


SRAM uses something that is very sticky, it's the only factory lube that i try to completely remove. I like the Shimano fish oil, I just wipe the surface dry and ride.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

*Chain wax? No.*

If you like a gummy chain, use wax lube. I am so over wax lubes. 

This is all I use now:

Chains 

It does the same thing as that "space age" wet lube, but is way, way less expensive. Mike gets 10K+ miles out of his chains. I can't argue with that.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

cxwrench said:


> Nooooooo.


Sure beats arguing about disc vs. rim brakes.


----------



## kiwisimon (Oct 30, 2002)

Tried Pedros ice wax a few years ago and didn't see any benefit so am back to Finishline either wet or dry.


----------



## Ventura Roubaix (Oct 10, 2009)

People a lot smarter than me have suggested various lubes to use on chains, but I have had real good results using chainsaw bar lube cut with a little mineral spirit, I have got more miles out of my chains, using this than any other type lube. I just relube once a month, avg about 400 miles, and wipe it off a couple times using wd-40.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

Lombard said:


> If you like a gummy chain, use wax lube. I am so over wax lubes.
> 
> This is all I use now:
> 
> ...


May I just say, Home Brew, yeah, me too.


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

takes longer, lasts shorter. for normal riding seems like a huge waste. maybe for a race


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

The bestest best way to keep a chain lubricated

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/821072597/scottoiler-cycle-s1-automatic-bicycle-chain-lube-s


----------



## blackfrancois (Jul 6, 2016)

Marc said:


> SRAM chains actually seem coated in actual chain lube.


love those first few weeks when they're new. so quiet.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

a chain lube thread...

how adorable.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

blackfrancois said:


> love those first few weeks when they're new. so quiet.


Probably because the factory rust inhibitor hasn't worn off yet. :yesnod:


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

velodog said:


> The bestest best way to keep a chain lubricated
> 
> https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/821072597/scottoiler-cycle-s1-automatic-bicycle-chain-lube-s


What a waste of money. 

Before adding weight to dribble more lube onto the chain, why not enclose it in a chain cover, like on the Dutch street bikes? I overhauled one a few years ago. The bike was dirty from riding and sitting up. The tires were at least 4-5 years old. But the chain was fully enclosed inside its cover and clean as a whistle. Amazing. They don't pick up dust and grit, don't gunk up the gears nor have to be cleaned every 400 miles. They'd work great with Shimano internally geared hubs.

And there ya go, 8 in back, one in front, same as all them single chain ring gravel bikes.


----------



## No Time Toulouse (Sep 7, 2016)

On my 'bad weather bike', I use a mix of 50% 30w small engine oil and 50% mineral spirits.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Fredrico said:


> What a waste of money.


I think it was meant as a joke. If not, well, what can I say? I fool and his/her money are soon parted.


----------



## WRM4865 (Mar 4, 2015)

Tested: Squirt Lube | VeloNews.com

Review: Squirt lube | road.cc

http://www.squirt-lube.de/wp-conten...ws-Chain-Lube-Efficiency-Tests-Combined-1.pdf


----------



## Opus51569 (Jul 21, 2009)

If you’re going to wax...










Do it right.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Peter Lauridsen (Jun 22, 2013)

Does it matter what weight synthetic oil for the "home brew"? I have some motorcycle 20-50 synthetic I used with my air cooled Ducati. Would that work? I'm deferring to those that might know. Thanks
Peter


Lombard said:


> If you like a gummy chain, use wax lube. I am so over wax lubes.
> 
> This is all I use now:
> 
> ...


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

Opus51569 said:


> If you’re going to wax...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ahhh, I love the smell, I had a bar melt in my van years ago when I surfed and it was the best car air freshener ever! That’s what summer should smell like!

I use wax on my mtb and it works well, that poor thing gets subjected to all kinds of hell the premadonna road bike never sees. Salt water, beach sand, snow and ice and muck. It’s a trooper. Chain has been fine so far.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Opus51569 said:


> If you’re going to wax...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That definitely brings back some memories!


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Peter Lauridsen said:


> Does it matter what weight synthetic oil for the "home brew"? I have some motorcycle 20-50 synthetic I used with my air cooled Ducati. Would that work? I'm deferring to those that might know. Thanks
> Peter


Hmmm. Most motor oils for cars are now much thinner than that. Mike T. lives in Canada, so he probably uses 5W20 or even 0W20. If you are using 20W50, use more mineral spirits like 75%/25%. The idea is that the home brew must be thin enough so it gets inside the rollers. The mineral spirits eventually evaporates and the oil is then inside where it will do some good. Remember that any lube on the outside of your chain only serves one purpose - to collect dirt! So, wipe, wipe, wipe!


----------



## tihsepa (Nov 27, 2008)

cxwrench said:


> That definitely brings back some memories!


Definately. We used to chew it while we waxed our sticks.


----------



## mtrac (Sep 23, 2013)

blackfrancois said:


> love those first few weeks when they're new. so quiet.


This. Also, with replacement costing $12.99, there's a limit to how much I'm going to obsess nursing a chain along.


----------



## Notvintage (May 19, 2013)

Nope. Lillylube yes.


----------



## TricrossRich (Mar 26, 2014)

MSW user here... I don't think I'll ever go back to traditional lubes. They're so messy and don't last nearly as long.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

TricrossRich said:


> MSW user here... I don't think I'll ever go back to traditional lubes. *They're so messy and don't last nearly as long.*


Messy? :shocked: Operator error, simple as that. 

Longevity? ut: You've been drinking.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

Lombard said:


> I think it was meant as a joke. If not, well, what can I say? I fool and his/her money are soon parted.


Oh, ok!  

With the blizzard of innovation going on, disc brakes, compact gearing, single chainrings, pizza sized pie plates in back, and "wide rims" I'm conditioned to consider everything! 

Oh, and MIPS helmets! :thumbsup: The market is always looking for a better helmet! Squandering $350 on that piece of foam and plastic is nothing compared to cost of your head! :yesnod:


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

TricrossRich said:


> MSW user here... I don't think I'll ever go back to traditional lubes. They're so messy and don't last nearly as long.


Definitely doing it wrong. I average about 700-800mi between lubes. And no mess. 
MSW isn't lasting nearly as long.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Fredrico said:


> With the blizzard of innovation going on, disc brakes, compact gearing, single chainrings, *pizza sized pie plates in back*, and "wide rims" I'm conditioned to consider everything!


Oh gawd! There you go again.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

i have never used chain wax, but it looks like it's A LOT of work to wax a chain!

But here's my opinion (yet another opinion) on chain lube, lol. I just use regular mineral spirit to dilute out any thick "winter" style lube. Then lube my bike every 2-3 rides. Lubing and cleaning with a rag regularly is the ONLY way to keep the chain clean. The diluted lube will both lube and clean the chain. Yeah that means more frequent lubing, but honestly it takes me 5 minutes to lube, 2 minutes if I'm in a hurry! Lube is lube. No such thing as a magical lube that will last more than 4-5 ride (if you care about your drivetrain).


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

aclinjury said:


> i have never used chain wax, but it looks like it's A LOT of work to wax a chain!
> 
> But here's my opinion (yet another opinion) on chain lube, lol. I just use regular mineral spirit to dilute out any thick "winter" style lube. Then lube my bike every 2-3 rides. Lubing and cleaning with a rag regularly is the ONLY way to keep the chain clean. The diluted lube will both lube and clean the chain. Yeah that means more frequent lubing, but honestly it takes me 5 minutes to lube, 2 minutes if I'm in a hurry! Lube is lube. No such thing as a magical lube that will last more than *4-5 ride* (if you care about your drivetrain).


My habits are about the same. Maybe less rides but I take quite long rides generally.
Yet, I lube my indoor trainer only bike maybe once a year (about 2000 indoor miles) weather it needs it or not.
The moral of the story is it has more to do with conditions than lube, technique or whatever.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

aclinjury said:


> Lube is lube...No such thing as a magical lube that will last more than 4-5 ride (if you care about your drivetrain).


ha...

good one.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Oxtox said:


> ha...
> 
> good one.


lol I didn't realize the imagery until you pointed out. Male keywords, "lube" and "rides" to ascribe bicycle chain maintenance!


----------



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

Peter Lauridsen said:


> Does it matter what weight synthetic oil for the "home brew"? I have some motorcycle 20-50 synthetic I used with my air cooled Ducati. Would that work? I'm deferring to those that might know. Thanks
> Peter


I can't tell the difference. I have been using homebrew for about 20 years now. I have tried synthetic versus conventional, different viscosity oil, and I cannot tell the difference, at least by just riding. I used the spend a lot more time worrying about this stuff, but at this stage I believe the difference between most chain lubes is negligible


----------



## TricrossRich (Mar 26, 2014)

cxwrench said:


> Messy? :shocked: Operator error, simple as that.
> 
> Longevity? ut: You've been drinking.


Ohhh... sly use of emoticons. Yes, messy... please, operator error. You act as if there's never been such a thing as a chainring tattoo. Now, you may be right, staying on top of cleaning, wiping it down etc, limits the likelihood of a tattoo, but it still messy. You drop a chain on a ride and if you need to pick it up to put it back on, you're gonna end up with a greasy hand, plain and simple. No matter how clean you think you keep your bike, that's gonna be the result. Its also something you have to stay on top of to eep it clean. With a waxed chain, I literally put it on and don't think about it again.

As far as longevity, yes... The lubes I've used recommend cleaning and re-lubing 200-400 miles. I'm getting 600 miles out of a waxed chain and that's without pushing it.



tlg said:


> Definitely doing it wrong. I average about 700-800mi between lubes. And no mess.
> MSW isn't lasting nearly as long.


what lube are you using that is going 700-800 miles?.... that isn't getting messy pushing it that long.



aclinjury said:


> i have never used chain wax, but it looks like it's A LOT of work to wax a chain!
> 
> But here's my opinion (yet another opinion) on chain lube, lol. I just use regular mineral spirit to dilute out any thick "winter" style lube. Then lube my bike every 2-3 rides. Lubing and cleaning with a rag regularly is the ONLY way to keep the chain clean. The diluted lube will both lube and clean the chain. Yeah that means more frequent lubing, but honestly it takes me 5 minutes to lube, 2 minutes if I'm in a hurry! Lube is lube. No such thing as a magical lube that will last more than 4-5 ride (if you care about your drivetrain).


I think its funny that so many people that "have never used chain wax" are chiming in on thread about chain wax, claiming they must know how bad it is. In terms of the work, it takes... I thought the same thing, until I actually tried it. It does take more times, initially. You have to get the chain very clean. I usually let it soak in degreaser for a few hours and then run it through an ultra-sonic cleaner a few times just to make sure. I heat the wax using a small slow-cooker, which takes maybe 45 minutes to get the wax up to temp. String the chain on to a hanger and dip it, swish it around for 45-60 seconds, take it out and let it hang to dry. I use 2 chains for each bike, so I always have one hanging, ready to use. I pop the quick-link, pull the chain, put a new one on and boom, I'm done. It literally takes maybe 5 minutes. The chain that comes off, I can then clean and re-wax, at my leisure, over the next few days. With the new chain on, shifting is a little stiff and the chain is a little noisy for the first 20 minutes or so until the wax is broken in. 

You're right... there's no magical lubes. They all have drawbacks and they all have advantages. It always amazes me how angry and ready to start an argument people are when you suggest that someone might want to try waxing when their not happy with traditional lubes... as if you've insulted their children or something.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

TricrossRich said:


> what lube are you using that is going 700-800 miles?.... that isn't getting messy pushing it that long.


Chain-L. 700-800 is the average. Even more in dry conditions.

So by "getting messy" you mean the chain getting "greasy"? It's as "messy" after 50mi as it is after 500mi. 



> You act as if there's never been such a thing as a chainring tattoo. Now, you may be right, staying on top of cleaning, wiping it down etc, limits the likelihood of a tattoo, but it still messy. You drop a chain on a ride and if you need to pick it up to put it back on, you're gonna end up with a greasy hand, plain and simple. No matter how clean you think you keep your bike, that's gonna be the result.


Chainring tattoo? Literally the last thing I worry about. The likelyhood... absolute zero. Haven't had one of those since.... can't remember how many years.

Dropping a chain? Can't remember the last one of those either, probably since the invention of chain catchers. But in the odd event it would happen, it results in grease on thumb and finger... not the whole hand. 2 seconds to wipe it the grass an on your way.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

TricrossRich said:


> Ohhh... sly use of emoticons. Yes, messy... please, operator error. You act as if there's never been such a thing as a chainring tattoo. Now, you may be right, staying on top of cleaning, wiping it down etc, limits the likelihood of a tattoo, but it still messy. You drop a chain on a ride and if you need to pick it up to put it back on, you're gonna end up with a greasy hand, plain and simple. No matter how clean you think you keep your bike, that's gonna be the result. Its also something you have to stay on top of to eep it clean. With a waxed chain, I literally put it on and don't think about it again.
> 
> As far as longevity, yes... The lubes I've used recommend cleaning and re-lubing 200-400 miles. I'm getting 600 miles out of a waxed chain and that's without pushing it.
> 
> ...


Based on your logic, I would have to try every single thing in life to be able to speak about it, then I'd in for a miserable experience because I would have to literally experience every single failure event in order to say some method is not working. But thankfully, humans have the capacity for abstraction. We can sort of integrate the information given to us, without ever experiencing the information personally, and use our brain to integrate if that solution would work for our case and if so to what extent. Well, in this thread, Cxwrench has chimed in, and I know that he's an experience mech, so his opinion probably means more than say a 13 year old hasn't wrench a bike in his life. And Cxwrench is not alone in this thread. There are many experienced riders in this thread also asking, "what's wrong with regular old lube"? So, what exactly do you find "funny" about my comments?? My comments would be funny if most of the guys in here support the chain wax procedure and claim it to be 1000% superior to regular old lube. And honestly, the procedure you describe above, having 2 chains, taking 45 minutes to heat up the wax, and the vidoe showing how waxing is done, sounds like a lot of work compared to my 2-5 minute regular chain lubing? I'd like hear your argument weighing the superiority of using chainwax versus the ease applying el cheapo chain lube in literally 2-5 min


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Anybody want to talk about the benefits of wider tires and lower pressures?


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

aclinjury said:


> I'd like hear your argument weighing the superiority of using chainwax versus the ease applying el cheapo chain lube in literally 2-5 min


There's 2 arguments. 
One is regular lube is messy and it's difficult to keep your body parts from touching a messy chain. 

Two is chain wax has "magic" properties (like ceramic bearings) that make you super fast with those extra 5 (claimed) watts they save. Like the OP link where they claim it's the "Fastest chain lube in Velo Magazine test". But if you've actually read the Velo Magazine test (I have), and know anything about testing (I do), the test method is utter horse$h!t.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

aclinjury said:


> lol I didn't realize the imagery until you pointed out. Male keywords, "lube" and "rides" to ascribe bicycle chain maintenance!


that's not what was amusing about your post...


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

wow I remember when this discussion started, some time in the late 80s. unresolved I guess.

i just buy whatever is on the checkout counter at the LBS. one less thing to have to think about

I will observe this though: man bike lubricants go a long ways. I still have chain lube (Pedros) from the 90s, along with newer ones. even half a tin of 20 yr old Judy Butter. and half a tube of Philwood grease from at least 13 years ago


----------



## TricrossRich (Mar 26, 2014)

aclinjury said:


> So, what exactly do you find "funny" about my comments?? My comments would be funny if most of the guys in here support the chain wax procedure and claim it to be 1000% superior to regular old lube. And honestly, the procedure you describe above, having 2 chains, taking 45 minutes to heat up the wax, and the vidoe showing how waxing is done, sounds like a lot of work compared to my 2-5 minute regular chain lubing? I'd like hear your argument weighing the superiority of using chainwax versus the ease applying el cheapo chain lube in literally 2-5 min


what's funny is that you're pretending to be an expert and offering advice on which way is better, without having tried both options. Its like asking someone, "what is better, Pizza or Tacos?" and they tell you, "Pizza, but I've never tried Tacos, but this guy over here had tacos and he said they weren't good, so I think pizza is the best." 

Additionally, do you think I'm standing there watching the wax melt in the slow-cooker for 45 minutes? Have you never used a slow-cooker in your life? You literally plug it in and walk away, go about your business and come back to it when its time to drop the chain in. It takes 10 seconds to plug in and 45 seconds to drop the chain in. Now, if you're suggesting a normal chain lube takes 2-5 minutes, I'd argue that you're not doing it correctly... You're not properly removing old, dirty lube from the chain and then you're not allow the new lube to dry on the chain as per most manufacturer's recommendations... The ones I used, muc-off, Boe-shield T-9, Dumonde Tech, etc... all recommended he chain sit overnight.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

tlg said:


> Chain-L. 700-800 is the average. Even more in dry conditions.
> 
> So by "getting messy" you mean the chain getting "greasy"? It's as "messy" after 50mi as it is after 500mi.
> 
> ...


Same here. :thumbsup: Been a while since I've dropped a chain. I have to touch the chain usually when taking off the rear wheel changing a flat, so I use the allen wrench, wipe if off in the grass, and pack a couple of handiwipes to get the road grime off the hands after replacing the tube.

Chain L rocks! I've got it on the commuter. Picks up dust no worse than the thinner stuff. A small drop on each roller. Wipe off excess after the first ride, and the drivetrain looks pretty clean thereafter. It's super smooth and quiet, doesn't get washed off by rain or wet roads. Wonderful stuff. The wear on the chain is probably about the same rate as with the thinner lubes. In any case not a big concern. 8 speed chains are less than $30. Have a stack of new ones in boxes ready to go!

I've used wax lubes from a bottle, White Lightening. The chain stays clean, but WTH, the drive train starts feeling rough after the first ride. Too much work to take the chain off and clean it overnight in mineral spirits or whatever and do it right. My chains are replaceable parts, like tires and derailleur cables. I switch them at 3000 mile intervals, just before they start to "stretch." I'm getting 10,000 miles on the cheap 6 speed 13-28 freewheels, $25. Good enough for me. What's not to like? No 32 tooth "climbing gear?" :lol:


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

TricrossRich said:


> what's funny is that you're pretending to be an expert and offering advice on which way is better, without having tried both options. Its like asking someone, "what is better, Pizza or Tacos?" and they tell you, "Pizza, but I've never tried Tacos, but this guy over here had tacos and he said they weren't good, so I think pizza is the best."
> 
> Additionally, do you think I'm standing there watching the wax melt in the slow-cooker for 45 minutes? Have you never used a slow-cooker in your life? You literally plug it in and walk away, go about your business and come back to it when its time to drop the chain in. It takes 10 seconds to plug in and 45 seconds to drop the chain in. Now, if you're suggesting a normal chain lube takes 2-5 minutes, I'd argue that you're not doing it correctly... You're not properly removing old, dirty lube from the chain and then you're not allow the new lube to dry on the chain as per most manufacturer's recommendations... The ones I used, muc-off, Boe-shield T-9, Dumonde Tech, etc... all recommended he chain sit overnight.


ok fair enough. But I'll wait until I see the overwhelming number of club riders and racers around my area switch from petroleum lube to wax before I'd bother.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Fredrico said:


> I've used wax lubes from a bottle, White Lightening.


White Lightning lasts for probably no more than 20 miles. It has about the lubricating properties of water. I'm not fond of wax lubes, but this one has got to be the worst.



Fredrico said:


> on the cheap 6 speed 13-28 freewheels, $25. Good enough for me. What's not to like? No 32 tooth "climbing gear?" :lol:


No comment.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

Fredrico said:


> 8 speed chains are less than $30.


So are 11sp chains. Under $20 on sale. :thumbsup:


----------



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

Lombard said:


> White Lightning lasts for probably no more than 20 miles. It has about the lubricating properties of water. I'm not fond of wax lubes, but this one has got to be the worst.
> 
> 
> 
> No comment.


I remember when White Lightening was all the rage. My LBS talked my into trying it and I decided to give it a try for whole bottle's worth. Yea, it will keep your chain clean but if you did not reapply it constantly your chain would squeak. This is one of the few prepared lubes that I have completely written off


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

Peter Lauridsen said:


> Does it matter what weight synthetic oil for the "home brew"?


Nope. And there's no need to use synthetic. Any non-vegetable oil or gear lube will work fine. The basic principle in home brew is the use of solvent to gain full lube penetration and to flush out the grit/gunk.


----------



## TricrossRich (Mar 26, 2014)

Fredrico said:


> I've used wax lubes from a bottle, White Lightening. The chain stays clean, but WTH, the drive train starts feeling rough after the first ride. Too much work to take the chain off and clean it overnight in mineral spirits or whatever and do it right. My chains are replaceable parts, like tires and derailleur cables. I switch them at 3000 mile intervals, just before they start to "stretch." I'm getting 10,000 miles on the cheap 6 speed 13-28 freewheels, $25. Good enough for me. What's not to like? No 32 tooth "climbing gear?" :lol:


To be clear, the OP is not talking about White Lightning or any of the other squirt able wax lubes, he referenced Molten Speed Wax, which is a hot wax lube. I've not tied any other squirt able wax lubes, so I'll hold judgement on them, but I've not heard good things and they are different than what we're talking about.



aclinjury said:


> ok fair enough. But I'll wait until I see the overwhelming number of club riders and racers around my area switch from petroleum lube to wax before I'd bother.


I honestly don't think you'll ever see an overwhelming number of riders switch, simply because at first glance, it does seem like more work. I was first told about hot wax lubes 3 years ago, but thought it sounded like a hassle... the prior to last season, I was talking to a couple of the well-respected, fast TT guys in my area and it seemed as if they were all using it. It was like a secret that no one really talked about. I decided to try it. Now, you may doubt if chain is more or less efficient and results in more speed, but I personally think that it does, but that's not honestly why I'd stick with it and not switch back at this point, the other benefits I listed are.... and I ultimately, I don't feel that I spend anymore time on my chain than anyone else, in fact, I find I'm spending less time.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

Lombard said:


> Hmmm. Most motor oils for cars are now much thinner than that. Mike T. lives in Canada, so he probably uses 5W20 or even 0W20. If you are using 20W50, use more mineral spirits like 75%/25%. The idea is that the home brew must be thin enough so it gets inside the rollers. The mineral spirits eventually evaporates and the oil is then inside where it will do some good. Remember that any lube on the outside of your chain only serves one purpose - to collect dirt! So, wipe, wipe, wipe!


I used a bottle of straight 30 weight mixed 50/50, and when the squirt bottle that I use to apply got about 1/4 down I just added mineral spirits to top it off, and my chain didn't know the difference.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

I tried waxing my chains about 30 yrs ago and decided, after maybe 2 or 3 applications that it was a waste. Not only did it flake off the chain leaving wax bits stuck all over the chain stays for the 1st 20\30 miles or so but the chain started squeaking somewhere between 50 to 100 miles.

But, man, it sure looked dry.

Oh, and if it rained it would probably start showing surface rust.


----------



## blackfrancois (Jul 6, 2016)

Lombard said:


> White Lightning lasts for probably no more than 20 miles.


weird. that's what i've preferred for the last ten years with zero problems. my drive train must be absolutely quiet. (i don't ride in the rain, though.)


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

velodog said:


> I tried waxing my chains about 30 yrs ago and decided, after maybe 2 or 3 applications that it was a waste. Not only did it flake off the chain leaving wax bits stuck all over the chain stays for the 1st 20\30 miles or so but the chain started squeaking somewhere between 50 to 100 miles.
> 
> But, man, it sure looked dry.
> 
> Oh, and if it rained it would probably start showing surface rust.



yeah, the mid-80s was the Paraffin Phase for me...tedious effort and way-less-than-acceptable results. not a winning scenario...

totally satisfied with my current lube and application regimen...every 25-30 rides (~750-850 miles).


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

blackfrancois said:


> weird. that's what i've preferred for the last ten years with zero problems. my drive train must be absolutely quiet. (i don't ride in the rain, though.)[/QUOTE
> 
> Yep. And mine gets abused unmercifully. I will re-apply after each ride if I’m exposing the chain to awful things like salt water. Been using it a few years on the mtb. I like that it kind of builds up, it seems to protect the chain because it gets under water, into snow, covered in muck, you name it... The beach sand alone is brutal, it’s like a sandblasting on every ride! Haha! Chain is just fine.
> 
> I switch between bikes from road to mtb, one with Finish Line Dry and one with White Lightening wax and frankly, both chains Work just fine and power the bike. I don’t feel any difference at all and I certainly don’t think there's a performance difference. I can’t imagine it matters all that much in reality, especially for most of us recreational riders.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

tlg said:


> So are 11sp chains. Under $20 on sale. :thumbsup:


About time! Good to hear!


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

Lombard said:


> Anybody want to talk about the benefits of wider tires and lower pressures?


Bah humbug. Another marketing gimmick!


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

PBL450 said:


> blackfrancois said:
> 
> 
> > weird. that's what i've preferred for the last ten years with zero problems. my drive train must be absolutely quiet. (i don't ride in the rain, though.)[/QUOTE
> ...


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

cxwrench said:


> PBL450 said:
> 
> 
> > It doesn't. Just don't bring it to me when it needs cleaning. Wax is the worst for getting between cogs and into places that make it a royal pain to clean. I will turn away a service bike if it's been lubed w/ WL or wax like we're talking about in this thread...not worth the time.
> ...


----------



## siclmn (Feb 7, 2004)

This wax oil debate will go on forever. Here is my take.
When you melt wax onto two pieces of metal and the wax cools and then you rub the metal pieces together the wax flakes off. Oil sticks and flows. Why in the Hell would you lube anything with wax? I know of no other mechanical devices that use wax as a lubricant. Would you lube a watch with wax? Is anything on a car lubed with wax? A bicycle chain is moving the whole time and the wax is falling off to the ground. It flakes off and does not flow or stick. The only good thing it does is keep your chain clean.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

siclmn said:


> This wax oil debate will go on forever. Here is my take.
> When you melt wax onto two pieces of metal and the wax cools and then you rub the metal pieces together the wax flakes off. Oil sticks and flows. Why in the Hell would you lube anything with wax? I know of no other mechanical devices that use wax as a lubricant. Would you lube a watch with wax? Is anything on a car lubed with wax? A bicycle chain is moving the whole time and the wax is falling off to the ground. It flakes off and does not flow or stick. The only good thing it does is keep your chain clean.


Aw man, did you have to come up with that inconvenient truth?  

Waxers will tell you the oil residue on the inadequately cleaned chain would stop wax from soaking into the metal and flake off when riding. But on a pristine clean chain the hot wax melts into the metal "grain" in the rollers, and stays there for 500 miles. 

So who's right?


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

siclmn said:


> This wax oil debate will go on forever. Here is my take.
> When you melt wax onto two pieces of metal and the wax cools and then you rub the metal pieces together the wax flakes off. Oil sticks and flows. Why in the Hell would you lube anything with wax? I know of no other mechanical devices that use wax as a lubricant. Would you lube a watch with wax? Is anything on a car lubed with wax? A bicycle chain is moving the whole time and the wax is falling off to the ground. It flakes off and does not flow or stick. The only good thing it does is keep your chain clean.


There aren't many machines that operate at the low temperatures and forces of a bicycle drivetrain. But wax lubricant seems to stick just fine to skis, snowboards and bullets.

For industrial applications, no one is going to take down a lathe drive to re-wax it. Maybe they would if they were pedaling it, though.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

cxwrench said:


> It doesn't. Just don't bring it to me when it needs cleaning. Wax is the worst for getting between cogs and into places that make it a royal pain to clean. I will turn away a service bike if it's been lubed w/ WL or wax like we're talking about in this thread...not worth the time.


The wax doesn't dissolve in mineral spirits? I haven't tried, but I thought it did.



Does anyone know if a chain immersed in hot wax for awhile will get clean? It seems like the most attractive feature of wax would be if all you needed to do was the wax bath and not a solvent cleaning first.

I've used paraffin baths for leather, before. You leave the sheath or whatever in the wax until the temp of the leather is the same as the wax. It changes the leather permanently and the wax doesn't shed after a certain point.

Given the level of lubrication basic paraffin provides in tests, I'm a little curious.


----------



## QuiQuaeQuod (Jan 24, 2003)

Fredrico said:


> Waxers will tell you the oil residue on the inadequately cleaned chain would stop wax from soaking into the metal and flake off when riding. But on a pristine clean chain the hot wax melts into the metal "grain" in the rollers, and stays there for 500 miles.
> 
> So who's right?



Think displacement, and what happens afterwards. Liquids flow, solids do not.

It really is that simple.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

Fredrico said:


> Aw man, did you have to come up with that inconvenient truth?
> 
> Waxers will tell you the oil residue on the inadequately cleaned chain would stop wax from soaking into the metal and flake off when riding. But on a pristine clean chain the hot wax melts into the metal "grain" in the rollers, and stays there for 500 miles.
> 
> *So who's right*?


Don't matter, we can take care of our chains as we see fit. But saying that, the waxers are wrong.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

QuiQuaeQuod said:


> Think displacement, and what happens afterwards. Liquids flow, solids do not.
> 
> It really is that simple.


And we have a winner! Best answer in this thread!



> Anybody want to talk about the benefits of wider tires and lower pressures?





Fredrico said:


> Bah humbug. Another marketing gimmick!


Lower pressures are a marketing gimmick? Last I heard, air is free.


----------



## n2deep (Mar 23, 2014)

cxwrench said:


> Nooooooo.


Absolutely-No-Flipping-Way

I clean my chain infrequently, apply a **** load of Rock an Roll or available lube every couple of weeks, ride the **** out of it and throw it in the trash for a new one about every year.. 

The Wax Manufacture states that the lube is good for 200 to 400 miles and then requires another application?? That sounds like a full time job. Some of us have other interests-demands-family-life.. That's just nuts..


----------



## n2deep (Mar 23, 2014)

Lombard said:


> Lower pressures are a marketing gimmick? Last I heard, air is free.


Not if you're using pure nitrogen as recommended or helium for your weight weenies.!!!!


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

n2deep said:


> Absolutely-No-Flipping-Way
> 
> I clean my chain infrequently, apply a **** load of Rock an Roll or available lube every couple of weeks, ride the **** out of it and throw it in the trash for a new one about every year..
> 
> The Wax Manufacture states that the lube is good for 200 to 400 miles and then requires another application?? That sounds like a full time job. Some of us have other interests-demands-family-life.. That's just nuts..


Rock n Roll is probably one of the better wax lubes as wax lubes go. But have you ever tried to apply this stuff when it's below 45F? It gels! How can it get into the *internal *parts of the chain if it gels as soon as it hits the *outside* of the chain?


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

n2deep said:


> Not if you're using pure nitrogen as recommended or helium for your weight weenies.!!!!


Ultra weight weenies use hydrogen. Even lighter.



Lombard said:


> Rock n Roll is probably one of the better wax lubes as wax lubes go. But have you ever tried to apply this stuff when it's below 45F? It gels! How can it get into the *internal *parts of the chain if it gels as soon as it hits the *outside* of the chain?


Man up and put out more watts. Friction will keep the chain warm.
Or carry a crock pot and battery pack.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

tlg said:


> Ultra weight weenies use hydrogen. Even lighter.


Oh yeah, that could be REALLY interesting. "Oh the humanity!"



tlg said:


> Man up and put out more watts.


I really doubt one could perceive any difference in performance based on lubes. All I care about is chain/cassette life and making the chain a little quieter. I don't give a rat's arse about saving 5 watts!


----------



## chriscc63 (Mar 9, 2011)

*sadly , according to this list molten is the bottom of the barrel, worst of the worst*



Creakyknees said:


> https://moltenspeedwax.com/


http://www.squirt-lube.de/wp-conten...ws-Chain-Lube-Efficiency-Tests-Combined-1.pdf


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

People keep saying that wax sheds while oil sticks. What are you all basing that claim on?


This article seems to be saying that paraffin is not just a better lubricant, but it is cleaner and longer lasting than oils:

https://www.scribd.com/document/262044061/Velo-Friction-Facts-Chain-Lube-Efficiency-Tests

Waxing your chain is a pain, and that's more than enough reason to not do it. But it isn't necessary to claim things that aren't true about wax to validate not using it. Wax sticks to metal very well.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

Kontact said:


> People keep saying that wax sheds while oil sticks. What are you all basing that claim on?
> 
> 
> This article seems to be saying that paraffin is not just a better lubricant, but it is cleaner and longer lasting than oils:
> ...


That article also praises the merits of a "super thin racing tire" so I'll take it with a grain of salt.

And as far as the chain shedding lube, I'll base my claim on having tried it. The chain is coming out of the pot coated in paraffin which is going to flake off and get all over the chainstays, chainrings and cogs, and doesn't just wipe off. Also, like I mentioned earlier, the chain can surface rust, which I find more unsightly than damp with oil, which can be wiped off.

Also, like mentioned in the article, the chain can go from lubed to dry right now, which can leave you miles from home with a dry chain complaining the rest of the ride. Unless a bottle of lube is going to be carried, which I doubt many are willing to do. Well unless on a long tour. But then wax would be out of the question, seeing as home is a tent, or the occasional hotel room.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

chriscc63 said:


> http://www.squirt-lube.de/wp-conten... the bottom of the barrel, worst of the worst


You're looking at the chart wrong. The claim is that is requires the lowest watts. So being at the bottom is good.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

velodog said:


> That article also praises the merits of a "super thin racing tire" so I'll take it with a grain of salt.
> 
> And as far as the chain shedding lube, I'll base my claim on having tried it. The chain is coming out of the pot coated in paraffin which is going to flake off and get all over the chainstays, chainrings and cogs, and doesn't just wipe off. Also, like I mentioned earlier, the chain can surface rust, which I find more unsightly than damp with oil, which can be wiped off.
> 
> Also, like mentioned in the article, the chain can go from lubed to dry right now, which can leave you miles from home with a dry chain complaining the rest of the ride. Unless a bottle of lube is going to be carried, which I doubt many are willing to do. Well unless on a long tour. But then wax would be out of the question, seeing as home is a tent, or the occasional hotel room.


Wax does shed, but that doesn't mean that the wax that breaks off is leaving the metal behind wax free.

You could certainly do it wrong and not let the chain get up to the wax temp before pulling it out of the pot, though.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

Kontact said:


> People keep saying that wax sheds while oil sticks. What are you all basing that claim on?
> 
> 
> This article seems to be saying that paraffin is not just a better lubricant, but it is cleaner and longer lasting than oils:
> ...


Did you read the testing method. It's hilarious. 
They submerged *ALL *chains in a 100°F bath of lube. Seriously! Who the F' lubes their chain in an oil bath? And what lube manufacturer would recommend doing that?

THEN... they hung the chains to dry for 30min. Only 30min after an friggin oil bath. 

THEN... for the longevity test (which was only 1hr ) they only chose 8 of the 30 lubes to "represent the various categories"

This "test" is so full of flaws I wouldn't trust one result from it. They clearly rigged the test to get the results they wanted.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

tlg said:


> Did you read the testing method. It's hilarious.
> They submerged *ALL *chains in a 100°F bath of lube. Seriously! Who the F' lubes their chain in an oil bath? And what lube manufacturer would recommend doing that?
> 
> THEN... they hung the chains to dry for 30min. Only 30min after an friggin oil bath.
> ...


Then it is a poor test, but one of several tests that show both increased lubrication and longer lubrication with paraffin. I was just wondering where the view that wax doesn't stick to the metal comes from? Wax has been used to protect metal forever because it sticks where oil dries up.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Kontact said:


> The wax doesn't dissolve in mineral spirits? I haven't tried, but I thought it did.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It flakes off and combined w/ any dirt/grit that gets into it, it then gets compacted into spaces between cogs and suck. Most 'oils' that get used on chains are very easy to clean, wax takes a bunch of scrubbing.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

I'm running out of popcorn.


----------



## SPlKE (Sep 10, 2007)

TricrossRich said:


> what's funny is that you're pretending to be an expert and offering advice on which way is better, without having tried both options. Its like asking someone, "what is better, Pizza or Tacos?" and they tell you, "Pizza, but I've never tried Tacos, but this guy over here had tacos and he said they weren't good, so I think pizza is the best."
> 
> Additionally, *do you think I'm standing there watching the wax melt in the slow-cooker for 45 minutes?* Have you never used a slow-cooker in your life? You literally plug it in and walk away, go about your business and come back to it when its time to drop the chain in. It takes 10 seconds to plug in and 45 seconds to drop the chain in. Now, if you're suggesting a normal chain lube takes 2-5 minutes, I'd argue that you're not doing it correctly... You're not properly removing old, dirty lube from the chain and then you're not allow the new lube to dry on the chain as per most manufacturer's recommendations... The ones I used, muc-off, Boe-shield T-9, Dumonde Tech, etc... all recommended he chain sit overnight.


Doesn't it take a lot of time and effort to clean gummy wax out of your slow cooker? 

That activity alone would be a deal killer for me, even if I thought wax was a good idea, which it's not. 

See also: typewriters, straight razors and harsh shaving soap, record players, tube TVs, CRTs, leaded gasoline... all stuff that was state-of-the-art back in the day, but most of which is for hipsters only nowadays.


----------



## JasonB176 (Aug 18, 2011)

I guess I’m in a tiny minority but I like White Lightning chain lube! Sure, it does have to be applied often but it’s a simple and quick thing to do. I’ve gotten excellent longevity out of my chains as it does a great job keeping them clean.


----------



## SPlKE (Sep 10, 2007)

White lightning doesn't hold a candle to Prolink.

Prolink. It's the friction mutiliator. It's got what chains crave.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

Kontact said:


> Then it is a poor test, but one of several tests that show both increased lubrication and longer lubrication with paraffin. I was just wondering where the view that wax doesn't stick to the metal comes from? Wax has been used to protect metal forever because it sticks where oil dries up.


Try it yourself. Wax a chain and ride it, see what you think. Come back and post your findings.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

SPlKE said:


> Doesn't it take a lot of time and effort to clean gummy wax out of your slow cooker?
> 
> That activity alone would be a deal killer for me, even if I thought wax was a good idea, which it's not.
> 
> See also: typewriters, straight razors and harsh shaving soap, record players, tube TVs, CRTs, leaded gasoline... all stuff that was state-of-the-art back in the day, but most of which is for hipsters only nowadays.


Wax isn't gummy. When hot it has the consistency of vegetable oil, and comes off of pots in the dishwasher.


Wasn't Prolink one of the worst lubricants in the Velonews tests?


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

velodog said:


> Try it yourself. Wax a chain and ride it, see what you think. Come back and post your findings.


My findings, like everyone else's non-laboratory findings, will be that wax seems to lube just fine, and you need to take the chain off to do it. My anecdotal claims about the relative lubricity of wax vs. every oil anyone has ever used are unlikely to be very convincing.

My personal experience using wax for mold making and will leather is that it is super easy to deal with and clean up, not "gummy" or dangerous.


Waxing chains is a pretty old technique, and it has always had its adherents and detractors. But no one had lab tests until recently that showed it actually was slicker than oil, as well as all the other stuff.


----------



## SPlKE (Sep 10, 2007)

Kontact said:


> Wax isn't gummy. When hot it has the consistency of vegetable oil, and comes off of pots in the dishwasher.
> 
> 
> Wasn't Prolink one of the worst lubricants in the Velonews tests?


If prolink was dissed by velonews, then I'll go with the opposite of whatever velonews says about anything.

Anyway, I take all these magazine bike equipment tests with a huge grain of salt. Ditto audio equipment, cars, tires, phones, cameras, wine, beer, restaurants, etc. My real world experience has been 180 degrees out from magazine test results so many times, I laugh at them now.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

SPlKE said:


> If prolink was dissed by velonews, then I'll go with the opposite of whatever velonews says about anything.
> 
> Anyway, I take all these magazine bike equipment tests with a huge grain of salt. Ditto audio equipment, cars, tires, phones, cameras, wine, beer, restaurants, etc. My real world experience has been 180 degrees out from magazine test results so many times, I laugh at them now.


Is paraffin wax gummy in your real world experience, too?


----------



## SPlKE (Sep 10, 2007)

Kontact said:


> Is paraffin wax gummy in your real world experience, too?


I stopped using paraffin wax soon after new lubricants were discovered in 1859.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

SPlKE said:


> I stopped using paraffin wax soon after new lubricants were discovered in 1859.


So you don't have any of that real world experience you value so much.


Back to the topic:
What strikes me with wax is that the reasons for doing it have never been better. Connex links make yanking a chain easy, chains are pricier and wear quicker and now there is data saying it actually has real value as a lubricant.


----------



## xxl (Mar 19, 2002)

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/components-wrenching/chain-dry-lube-paraffin-wax-82099.html


----------



## SPlKE (Sep 10, 2007)

Kontact said:


> So you don't have any of that real world experience you value so much.
> 
> 
> Back to the topic:
> What strikes me with wax is that the reasons for doing it have never been better. Connex links make yanking a chain easy, chains are pricier and wear quicker and now there is data saying it actually has real value as a lubricant.


I don't have any real world experience writing with a quill pen either. That doesn't make me feel guilty about preferring a ball point pen that can write under whipped cream instead of a sharpened goose feather and an ink well.


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

I find a hilarious similarity between these two in terms of overall effort required:

https://moltenspeedwax.com/pages/clean-your-chain

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/chainclean.html

FIVE rinses before it's MAYBE ready for wax, including overnight soakings. It's ridiculous.


----------



## SPlKE (Sep 10, 2007)

DrSmile said:


> I find a hilarious similarity between these two in terms of overall effort required:
> 
> https://moltenspeedwax.com/pages/clean-your-chain
> 
> ...


Apparently, that kind of chain maintenance is great fun for the OCD cyclist.


PS: I'd hate to see what kind of procedures the moltenslowwax people recommend.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

SPlKE said:


> Apparently, that kind of chain maintenance is great fun for the OCD cyclist.
> 
> 
> PS: I'd hate to see what kind of procedures the moltenslowwax people recommend.


You only do that before the first application. You never clean the chain again, just re-wax.


You can get a chain painfully clean with gasoline in 10 minutes, but no one is going to recommend using gas as a chain solvent because people can't be trusted to do things carefully.



I'm curious if simply leaving a dirty chain in a hot wax bath for 15 minutes would do the same thing. Wax is a very thin oil, but with a high freezing temp.


----------



## ceugene (Jun 20, 2015)

https://zerofrictioncycling.com.au/lubetesting/

Another source that isn't tied to Ceramic Speed / Friction Facts.

I have not tried wax dipping my chains, but have thought about it. I would be using a dedicated pot and dipping several chains at once, rotating them every 400-500mi, then dipping them all at once again. It really wouldn't take that much extra time.

Like TricrossRich, I do not get more than about 200-250mi out of any drip lube because I run the plates pretty much bone dry and wipe down every other ride. This includes Dumonde Tech Pro X Lite, Rock n Roll Gold/Extreme, NFS, Morgan Blue, Squirt, Smoove, etc. 

Dumonde and RnR are both dry and basically teflon based. They run pretty clean when wiped down thoroughly after application. NFS and Morgan Blue require wipe downs for 3 rides in a row they stop being excessively wet.

Squirt might be the worst of them all for longevity. For the first 20 miles, a Squirt lubed chain is absolutely silent, but after 60-70 miles there is rasping. I used to get gummy black wax build-up with Squirt between cogs and chainrings, on jockey wheels, etc. but I changed the way I apply it and wipe off the excess at least once. I have a huge bottle of Squirt to go through, so I just use it on my spare bike during indoor training. In a clean indoor environment, I can extend the life of one Squirt application to maybe 12 hours of Zwift at ~270W. It still throws small black flecks on my trainer mat even after several months of use.

Smoove runs longest in dry conditions of any drip lube I've tried, it's quit a bit gummier than Squirt, so it's the hardest to wipe down between rides. For me it seems to have worked decently well in the rain. My Red 22 chain continues to be rust free despite the guy in the link above saying it behaves poorly in the rain.

Molten Speed Wax, AFAIK, does not get gummy like Squirt, Smoove or any wax drip lubes. It dries into a solid and when it flakes off it doesn't usually stick to the rest of the drivetrain. From what I've seen locally, nothing runs cleaner than a wax dipped chain. As long as you treat many chains at once and use Wippemann Connex quick-links, the sum of time spent is really not that much different than what it takes to keep a drip lubed drivetrain reasonably clean. According to the source in the above Zero Friction Cycling link, it's also the cheapest when you consider how long he was able to extend the life of the chain. I have heard of chains lasting so long the plates actually wear away before the pins/rollers do.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

SPlKE said:


> PS: I'd hate to see what kind of procedures the molten*slow*wax people recommend.


LOL! Good one! :lol:


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

https://zerofrictioncycling.com.au/product-tag/racey/

A fool and his money are soon parted.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

ceugene said:


> https://zerofrictioncycling.com.au/lubetesting/
> 
> Another source that isn't tied to Ceramic Speed / Friction Facts.


But they're tied to selling "Racey Stuff" which is pretty much just Molten Speed Wax & $200-$300 chains.

I'm sure they're "testing" isn't biased.


----------



## TricrossRich (Mar 26, 2014)

SPlKE said:


> Doesn't it take a lot of time and effort to clean gummy wax out of your slow cooker?
> 
> That activity alone would be a deal killer for me, even if I thought wax was a good idea, which it's not.


I don't have to clean the slow-cooker. I picked up a small slow-cooker that I've dedicated for this use for like $15 from Amazon. Obviously, you could respond with something like, "Oh, that's $15 to spend to do this," and you'd be right, but honestly, that's less than buying one of those fancy chain cleaner scrubber things from Park tool or Pedro's.



Kontact said:


> You only do that before the first application. You never clean the chain again, just re-wax.
> 
> 
> You can get a chain painfully clean with gasoline in 10 minutes, but no one is going to recommend using gas as a chain solvent because people can't be trusted to do things carefully.
> ...


Right... as I said in my initial write up. The first time cleaning the chain is a little bit of a time suck, but that is a one time thing. Once a chain has been waxed and is in the "system" so to speak you don't have to do this comprehensive cleaning process. I've tried a few different methods for chains that are coming off the bike to see if it makes any difference... 

1. Using a pro-gold towel to wipe down and clean the chain prior to putting it in the wax.

2. Drop the chain in a container of mineral spirits and giving it a good shake.

3. Do nothing... just drop the chain with loose wax into the hot wax.

Of the three options, obviously #3 is the simplest. There's no dirt and grime on the chains in theory this should be fine, but there's still a part of my brain that thinks I should at least wipe it down first. Option #2 is a little more time intensive, takes a few minutes and then have to let the chain dry a little before it goes into the wax. I did this a few times with the chains form my race bike, but after a while, I found it really offered no benefit, so I've stopped. #1 is what I do now... chain comes off.. wipe down with pro-gold towel, then dry it off with a paps towel and in it goes.



ceugene said:


> https://zerofrictioncycling.com.au/lubetesting/
> 
> Another source that isn't tied to Ceramic Speed / Friction Facts.
> 
> ...


As you noted... there would be times when I got many more than 200-250 miles out of a wet-lubed chain, but that's always when the chain got dirtier and blacker. If I stayed on top of wiping it and cleaning it to keep it clean, I need to do a proper cleaning and full-re-lubing. I've found that the wax eliminates all of this. I literally don't think about my chains in between rides now until its time to swap and then its a 5 minute process. It has, literally, taken me longer to respond to this post then it does to swap chains. Regarding the gumminess and build up between cogs etc... When I first mentioned I was going to try this, to the chief mechanic at my LBS, he said the same thing. It was something I was worried about. It has not proven to be the case. I think that the difference lies in the application. I've heard about this gumminess and build up, specifically in connection with squirt-based wax lubes and I'm wondering if that his experience was related to people use that type of product. He's worked on and handled all of my bikes in the past year and has never commented on any wax build up and I've not seen any... and I had over 12,000 miles of combined road, trainer, MTB and TT racing last year. In regards to chain wear, I seem to be getting better mileage/less wear. I'm actively keeping track of this aspect and treating it as an experiment. I have about 8000 miles lats year on my training bike, split between outside rides and trainer rides, using two chains and both are still well within spec for stretch/wear when I measure them, but I've also been swapping chains at about 600 miles or so... I could probably push the chains further, but I suspect there'd be more wear on the chains as I pushed further. 

The biggest downside I've experienced with the waxed chains is shifting in extreme cold. if I ride from my house, there seems to be no effect, but one ride back in December, I threw the bike on the rack behind my truck. We started our red that morning and it was 24*F... freezing cold. Early in the ride, I was getting some strange ghost shifting. I think it was because the wax had frozen from being on the back of the truck on the ride to the start location. It was similar to how the bike reacts when you first put a freshly waxed chain before its ridden it... After about 10 minutes of riding, it went away, which is similar to the ride-in process of a new chain.


----------



## SPlKE (Sep 10, 2007)

So how much does this wax weigh, compared to regular chain lube?

If I can shed a gram or two, I'm all in.


----------



## TricrossRich (Mar 26, 2014)

SPlKE said:


> So how much does this wax weigh, compared to regular chain lube?
> 
> If I can shed a gram or two, I'm all in.


Given your other responses in the thread, I'm assuming this is sarcastic. I haven't weighed a waxed chain vs. a traditionally lubed chain, but I'd imagine, based strictly on working with both, that a waxed chain is heavier, but not to any amount that you or I would notice.


----------



## SPlKE (Sep 10, 2007)

TricrossRich said:


> Given your other responses in the thread, I'm assuming this is sarcastic. I haven't weighed a waxed chain vs. a traditionally lubed chain, but I'd imagine, based strictly on working with both, that a waxed chain is heavier, but not to any amount that you or I would notice.


I was being sarcastic.

I'll shutup now.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

about the reference to the time it takes to clean and lube a chain. According to me, it takes me less than 5 minutes max to lube and clean my chain, 2 minutes if i'm in a hurry. I do this twice per week. Add in another 5 minutes to clean the cassette once per week. We're talking 10 - 15 min max per week of chain maintenance to keep a shinny chain. Some people take longer time to take a sh8t. Perspective.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

SPlKE said:


> I was being sarcastic.
> 
> I'll shutup now.


Awwww come on, we need the comic relief.


----------



## MoPho (Jan 17, 2011)

Been using Wend Wax. Easy and quick to apply, works great, chain stays pretty clean, and it smells good too. 

Only "negative" is that it needs to be done every 150 miles or so, which I actually find to be a good thing since it sets up a routine unlike Chain-L which lasts a long time and I would forget to reapply it until my chain started to make noise. I used Chain-L for years, but got over how messy it is 



,.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

Is anyone using straight craft store white paraffin?


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

MoPho said:


> ...used Chain-L for years, but got over how messy it is.


been using it for years, don't find it 'messy' unless I apply too much...only takes a micro-drop on each link.


----------



## Finx (Oct 19, 2017)

Kontact said:


> Is anyone using straight craft store white paraffin?


Wouldn't you have to add some kind of softening agent to prevent it from flaking off? 

I've been using Molten Speed Wax in a crockpot for a couple of years. It has pro's and cons. For me the pro's outweigh the cons (when compared to traditional petroleum lubes). It only takes a couple of minutes to open the Wipperman link, one quick wipe of the chain, then loop it over a loop of coathanger wire bent in a "J" shape, and into the crockpot for a few min.

While the chain is in the pot, I wipe the bike down with Boeshield T-9 and do a quick inspection of the crank and rings. Then remove the chain from the pot and put it back on the bike and give it a spin while the wax is still warm.

Clean, shiny, dry drive train that has very low friction loss and very little wear on components. 

Yes it's a little more involved than just slathering oil on your chain, but my bikes live inside my condo when they aren't being ridden, and I love my bikes being clean and dry.


----------



## MoPho (Jan 17, 2011)

Oxtox said:


> been using it for years, don't find it 'messy' unless I apply too much...only takes a micro-drop on each link.



Actually, the directions for Chain-L specifically say to oil generously. And then it takes a lot of wiping it down to get it so it is not messy. Chain-L also attracted a lot of dirt in my experience, chain would become black pretty quick
Putting a "micro-drop" on each link would be tedious and time consuming, particularly because it is so thick. Then add in the recommended 10+ minutes before wiping it down. With Wend Wax I would be long done and on my bike. 


.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

Finx said:


> Wouldn't you have to add some kind of softening agent to prevent it from flaking off?
> 
> I've been using Molten Speed Wax in a crockpot for a couple of years. It has pro's and cons. For me the pro's outweigh the cons (when compared to traditional petroleum lubes). It only takes a couple of minutes to open the Wipperman link, one quick wipe of the chain, then loop it over a loop of coathanger wire bent in a "J" shape, and into the crockpot for a few min.
> 
> ...


I don't see why. When hot wax cools on a hot metal, they stick together. When the blobs of extra wax flake off they don't leave the metal bare - the wax is just shearing off itself.

This is the original "chain wax" that has been used for decades, and the stuff that did so well in some of the tests. Why does it need additives to stick and lube?



But I wouldn't mount a chain full of hot wax on a bike, either. Put the chain on a paper towel to pull off the extra wax, just like bacon. Mount the chain when cool.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

MoPho said:


> Actually, the directions for Chain-L specifically say to oil generously. And then it takes a lot of wiping it down to get it so it is not messy. Chain-L also attracted a lot of dirt in my experience, chain would become black pretty quick
> Putting a "micro-drop" on each link would be tedious and time consuming, particularly because it is so thick. Then add in the recommended 10+ minutes before wiping it down. With Wend Wax I would be long done and on my bike. .



for me, applying the lube sparingly and letting things site overnite routinely produces 750+ miles before the chain becomes noisy...and the 3 minutes required to apply is considered 'bonding time' with the bike. 

guessing the advice to 'oil generously' helps sales.

have been in the habit of wiping the chain after every ride forever, regardless of lube used.


----------



## MoPho (Jan 17, 2011)

Oxtox said:


> for me, applying the lube sparingly and letting things site overnite routinely produces 750+ miles before the chain becomes noisy...and the 3 minutes required to apply is considered 'bonding time' with the bike.
> 
> guessing the advice to 'oil generously' helps sales.
> 
> have been in the habit of wiping the chain after every ride forever, regardless of lube used.














.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

Oxtox said:


> for me, applying the lube sparingly and letting things site overnite routinely produces 750+ miles before the chain becomes noisy...and the 3 minutes required to apply is considered 'bonding time' with the bike.


I put 1-2 drops per roller. Takes about 5 min. And I'm good for 700+ miles... or about 7 weeks. I'm ok with spending 2 extra minutes so I don't have to bother for 7 weeks.

Can I have 2 cookies?


----------



## scott967 (Apr 26, 2012)

tlg said:


> You're looking at the chart wrong. The claim is that is requires the lowest watts. So being at the bottom is good.


I do use MSW, but "Friction Facts" developed the wax formula and MSW is just the formula pre-mixed so I'm not surprised that it came out best.

scott s.
.


----------



## Finx (Oct 19, 2017)

Kontact said:


> I don't see why. When hot wax cools on a hot metal, they stick together. When the blobs of extra wax flake off they don't leave the metal bare - the wax is just shearing off itself.
> 
> This is the original "chain wax" that has been used for decades, and the stuff that did so well in some of the tests. Why does it need additives to stick and lube?
> 
> ...


Of course I paper towel the excess wax off of the outside of the plates before I put it on the bike!

Have you tried a plain paraffin wax (without any additives)? I think you'll find it makes a mess when you start pedaling. Give it a shot and let us know how it goes. I'll stick with MSW.

And the chain cools enough to handle by hand just walking from the crockpot to the bike. I usually wear standard 6mil gloves when I'm handling it, just as a precaution, but I don't put the chain on when it's super hot. It cools down very fast.

I just like to get it on the bike and cycle it through a few pedal strokes while the wax is still soft. It pushes any extra wax around the ends of the plates out of the way and prevents excess flaking when it's fresh.

If you let the chain cool completely, it gets stiff, making it a tad harder to work with. Some people do it this way, and it's fine. Just my preference.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

Finx said:


> Of course I paper towel the excess wax off of the outside of the plates before I put it on the bike!


I'm sorry, you didn't make it sound like you did with your description of taking it out of the pot and putting it right on the bike!



I haven't tried waxing a chain, yet. But people have used regular wax for a long time, and I'd rather have a trail of hard wax chunks getting flung off the bike at the begining of the ride than getting liquid wax down into the cassette. Either way, if the chain is reasonably hot out of the wax, letting it sit on paper towels will get an awful lot off of the surface, as I've seen from working with paraffin for other stuff.


----------



## Finx (Oct 19, 2017)

Kontact said:


> I'm sorry, you didn't make it sound like you did with your description of taking it out of the pot and putting it right on the bike!
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't tried waxing a chain, yet. But people have used regular wax for a long time, and I'd rather have a trail of hard wax chunks getting flung off the bike at the begining of the ride than getting liquid wax down into the cassette. Either way, if the chain is reasonably hot out of the wax, letting it sit on paper towels will get an awful lot off of the surface, as I've seen from working with paraffin for other stuff.


I've been doing this on four bikes for three plus years. I've refined my process pretty well. It takes a little practice, but once you've done it a few times, it doesn't take long at all, and, at least for me, it's worth the few minutes of extra time to have a clean, long lasting drive train.


----------



## tka (Jun 11, 2014)

By chance I ended up building 2 bikes with very similar drivetrains, Chorus 11, at roughly the same time. 1 was lubed with wax (the friction facts formula,) the other with ProLink. When I sold the second bike I had put ~1200 miles on it, and the chain was worn to 132.39mm (Campag chains new are right around 132.20mm, the wear limit is 132.60mm) On the bike with the waxed chain it has about 4400 miles on the chain, and the wear is 132.36. Or roughly 3 1/2 times the mileage with the same wear. 

Since I find it takes almost no additional time to wax the chain I'll keep waxing them.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

MoPho said:


> .



Ha! If you want to get on my good side, you would have to do a lot better than that.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

tka said:


> By chance I ended up building 2 bikes with very similar drivetrains, Chorus 11, at roughly the same time. 1 was lubed with wax (the friction facts formula,) the other with ProLink. When I sold the second bike I had put ~1200 miles on it, and the chain was worn to 132.39mm (Campag chains new are right around 132.20mm, the wear limit is 132.60mm) On the bike with the waxed chain it has about 4400 miles on the chain, and the wear is 132.36. Or roughly 3 1/2 times the mileage with the same wear.
> 
> Since I find it takes almost no additional time to wax the chain I'll keep waxing them.


So the Prolink bike had 1200 miles with virtually no chain wear, the hot wax bike had 4400 miles with virtually no chain wear? Bikes didn't even have the same mileage. So what is to prove that the Prolink bike wouldn't have done well at 4400 miles?

Flawed experiment. Proves nothing.


----------



## MoPho (Jan 17, 2011)

Lombard said:


> Ha! If you want to get on my good side, you would have to do a lot better than that.


Perhaps I was trying to get on your bad side... :wink:


----------



## SPlKE (Sep 10, 2007)

Lombard said:


> So the Prolink bike had 1200 miles with virtually no chain wear, the hot wax bike had 4400 miles with virtually no chain wear? Bikes didn't even have the same mileage. So what is to prove that the Prolink bike wouldn't have done well at 4400 miles?
> 
> Flawed experiment. Proves nothing.


Excellent rebuttal.

I believe the ProLink benefits don't really kick in until about 1500 miles. Then it's super-smooth sailing from there out out to 10,000 miles. I have no proof, of course. But my anecdotes are powerful medicine.


----------



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

Lombard said:


> So the Prolink bike had 1200 miles with virtually no chain wear, the hot wax bike had 4400 miles with virtually no chain wear? Bikes didn't even have the same mileage. So what is to prove that the Prolink bike wouldn't have done well at 4400 miles?
> 
> Flawed experiment. Proves nothing.


With ProLink, once the metal friction reducer technology kicks in, the chain improves with age


----------



## SPlKE (Sep 10, 2007)

DaveG said:


> With ProLink, once the metal friction reducer technology kicks in, the chain improves with age


ProLink. The friction mutilator! It's got what chains crave!


----------



## tka (Jun 11, 2014)

Lombard said:


> So the Prolink bike had 1200 miles with virtually no chain wear, the hot wax bike had 4400 miles with virtually no chain wear? Bikes didn't even have the same mileage. So what is to prove that the Prolink bike wouldn't have done well at 4400 miles?
> 
> Flawed experiment. Proves nothing.


And there are questions on why this forum is dying. I'm ****ing out of here.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

tka said:


> And there are questions on why this forum is dying. I'm ****ing out of here.


Oh, so you're going to take your ball and go home because I called you out on a flawed experiment? Really? Com'on dude!


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

DaveG said:


> With ProLink, once the metal friction reducer technology kicks in, the chain improves with age


Except it doesn't. In tests this marketing claim has been found to be horse hockey. The wear with Prolink and other "metal conditioners" progressed just as linearly as any other lubricant.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Kontact said:


> Except it doesn't. In tests this marketing claim has been found to be horse hockey. The wear with Prolink and other "metal conditioners" progressed just as linearly as any other lubricant.


I really think he was joking. Someone needs a new sarcasm detector.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

Lombard said:


> I really think he was joking. Someone needs a new sarcasm detector.


When the "sarcasm" sounds pretty much like the marketing, it gets hard to detect.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Kontact said:


> When the "sarcasm" sounds pretty much like the marketing, it gets hard to detect.


Except that if this is really marketing, it's pretty far out there. "A chain lube that allows your chain to age like a fine wine"?


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

Lombard said:


> Except that if this is really marketing, it's pretty far out there. "A chain lube that allows your chain to age like a fine wine"?


A chain lube that proportionately slows wear as it is used is exactly what's being claimed.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

Lombard said:


> Oh, so you're going to take your ball and go home because I called you out on a flawed experiment? Really? Com'on dude!


It's true that when posting on forums, one needs to have thicker skin. Without it, they'll never learn anything.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

bvber said:


> It's true that when posting on forums, one needs to have thicker skin. Without it, they'll never learn anything.


It is more that people who know what they're talking about get tired of pointless arguments with people who know very little and don't actually care about the discussion, just the argument.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

Lombard said:


> Ha! If you want to get on my good side, you would have to do a lot better than that.


Lots of protein! This post belongs to _Clydesdales_ thread.


----------



## SPlKE (Sep 10, 2007)

Lombard said:


> Except that if this is really marketing, it's pretty far out there. "A chain lube that allows your chain to age like a fine wine"?


All kidding aside, I've actually seen stretched-out chains contract and return to like-new specs when soaked in a bath of ProLink overnight.


----------



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

SPlKE said:


> All kidding aside, I've actually seen stretched-out chains contract and return to like-new specs when soaked in a bath of ProLink overnight.


As a balding person, I have often wondered if one of the many miraculous properties of Prolink is that will grow hair


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

DaveG said:


> As a balding person, I have often wondered if one of the many miraculous properties of Prolink is that will grow hair


It won't, I tried. 

A guy at the bike shop, with a thick head of hair, said it did it for him, so I tried it for about 8 months. I used it like Brylcreem, even wore polyester pants to complete the look, but all that came of it was a lot of ruined pillow cases.

That SoB at the shop sure played me.


----------



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

velodog said:


> It won't, I tried.
> 
> A guy at the bike shop, with a thick head of hair, said it did it for him, so I tried it for about 8 months. I used it like Brylcreem, even wore polyester pants to complete the look, but all that came of it was a lot of ruined pillow cases.
> 
> That SoB at the shop sure played me.


That is too bad, but don't focus on the negative. Your chain will last forever


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Kontact said:


> A chain lube that proportionately slows wear as it is used is exactly what's being claimed.


As was said earlier, there's one born every minute.

Just go into any auto store and look at all the oil and gas additives that claim they do everything from improving your gas mileage to doubling your engine's life. 

And remember the one word added to shampoo bottles that doubled sales - "repeat".


----------



## xxl (Mar 19, 2002)

velodog said:


> It won't, I tried.
> 
> A guy at the bike shop, with a thick head of hair, said it did it for him, so I tried it for about 8 months. I used it like Brylcreem, even wore polyester pants to complete the look, but all that came of it was a lot of ruined pillow cases.
> 
> That SoB at the shop sure played me.



Did you remove the original manufacturer's coating from your head before you applied the chain wax?

If not, well, there's your problem right there.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

xxl said:


> Did you remove the original manufacturer's coating from your head before you applied the chain wax?
> 
> If not, well, there's your problem right there.


The original coating was/is mostly gone, that's why I was using it, to grow it back.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

DaveG said:


> That is too bad, but don't focus on the negative. Your chain will last forever


I never thought to use the stuff on my chain, but after my experience using it on my head I don't think that I'll try it on the chain.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

velodog said:


> I never thought to use the stuff on my chain, but after my experience using it on my head I don't think that I'll try it on the chain.


But why not? Did your scalp stretch at all?


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

velodog said:


> It won't, I tried.
> 
> A guy at the bike shop, with a thick head of hair, said it did it for him, so I tried it for about 8 months. I used it like Brylcreem, even wore polyester pants to complete the look, but all that came of it was a lot of ruined pillow cases.
> 
> That SoB at the shop sure played me.


You probably did it wrong. You need to put it in a crock pot at 100°F and let your head soak in it.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

tlg said:


> You probably did it wrong. You need to put it in a crock pot at 100°F and let your head soak in it.


That advice is sounding a lot like the advice I was getting from that guy in the shop.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

Lombard said:


> But why not? Did your scalp stretch at all?


Well, no. Maybe I let my disillusionment color my perspective.


----------



## SPlKE (Sep 10, 2007)

DaveG said:


> As a balding person, I have often wondered if one of the many miraculous properties of Prolink is that will grow hair


As brother velodog says, it won't regrow hair.

That said, I was having a serious problem with my left knee. The doctor wanted to inject steroids directly into the knee. I said "No way!" and handed him a bottle of ProLink. "Inject this!" I said. He did, and knee was immediately and permanently fixed. End of story.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

SPlKE said:


> As brother velodog says, it won't regrow hair.
> 
> That said, I was having a serious problem with my left knee. The doctor wanted to inject steroids directly into the knee. I said "No way!" and handed him a bottle of ProLink. "Inject this!" I said. He did, and knee was immediately and permanently fixed. End of story.


Before I try that, what bike shop do you hang out at?


----------



## SPlKE (Sep 10, 2007)

velodog said:


> Before I try that, what bike shop do you hang out at?


I call it The Bikeshop of the Mind.


----------



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

SPlKE said:


> As brother velodog says, it won't regrow hair.
> 
> That said, I was having a serious problem with my left knee. The doctor wanted to inject steroids directly into the knee. I said "No way!" and handed him a bottle of ProLink. "Inject this!" I said. He did, and knee was immediately and permanently fixed. End of story.


I have heard of a faith healer before, but never a friction healer


----------



## ceugene (Jun 20, 2015)

Alright, this thread piqued my curiosity so I finally decided to try wax dipping my chain. For the past 2 weeks I have been running to the Friction Facts recipe of 1lb paraffin wax, 5g PTFE powder, 1g MoS2 powder. The MoS2 powder turns the wax from white to very dark gray. I bought a 1.5qt slow cooker for $9 on Amazon. In fact I bought everything from Amazon.

I fashioned the Molten Speed Wax "swisher tool" out of a wire coat hanger and looped my chain through it. I cut the paraffin wax bar into 4 pieces and set them in the pot. I turned on the slow cooker to its high setting and walked away. After an hour the bars were mostly melted, but there were still a couple of bigger pieces sunk on the bottom. I added the PTFE and MoS2 at this time and swished it around a bit. I then added the chain and swisher tool. As the last of the wax melted, I switched the slow cooker to warm mode and walked away for 10min. When I came back there were no bubbles rising to the top anymore, so I unplugged everything and let the wax cool to about 140F, giving the chain a few swishes right before pulling it out.

When I pulled the chain out, I held it over the pot for a few seconds to let the excess liquefied wax drip back into the pot before unfurling it onto a hook I had made from another wire coat hanger. After a couple of minutes of hanging, the wax was already quite solid and the chain was very stiff. I left and let it cool off further. At no point did I need to wipe down the chain with a rag or anything like that.

After the chain had cooled to room temp, I came back and started manipulating the links. I then put the chain on my bike and backpedaled it some more. The next day, in the first few minutes the chain was noticeable stiff and making a little noise. After 5 minutes it was basically silent. It's about as silent as running Dumonde or RnR very dry with no excess lube on the outer plates. After 45mi the drivetrain was largely dirt free minus some flecks of grayish wax on some rollers and on my chainstay. Unlike with Squirt, Smoove or other wax drip lubes, these flecks could be blown off or brushed off with ease...no smearing at all. I ran my finger over the chain. Not only did my finger look completely clean after doing this, it there was no gooey feeling like I'd have with Squirt or Smoove. After another 45mi, more of the same. After 50mi more, still the same. I have put 250mi on the chain and so far I don't feel like it's making any additional noises. Shifts are as smooth as ever.

Compared to Squirt...no comparison. It lasts way longer in real riding conditions, doesn't build up on the drivetrain and is a lot cleaner to the touch. I have a big bottle of Squirt that I am using on my spare/Zwift bike. Even after months of use, the semi-solid Squirt flecks that fly off my chain are black. This is from riding exclusively indoors. Squirt just seems inherently dirty to me. It racks up a lot more mileage on the trainer than it does outdoors, but I've never been happy with its performance.

Compared to Smoove...Wax probably lasts longer. Smoove is gummier than Squirt. It's final state is even less solid so it doesn't pass the finger test as well. Smoove is the best wax drip lube that I've tried so far. I have not tried Ceramic Speed's UFO Drip, but I hear it runs really dry.

Compared to dry lubes like Dumonde Tech Pro X Lite and RnR Gold. Wax lasts longer and is cleaner at any stage short of a full wipe down. Wiping down either of these lubes leaves lots of black oil/grease on a rag. It only takes a minute, but I hate having to do it every other ride.

So far I've been really pleased with the combination of cleanliness, durability and endurance of wax dipping. There is a lot of initial prep, but the actual labor is minimal. You turn the slow cooker on and walk away. You hang the chain up and walk away. You can get 9lbs of paraffin at Michael's for like $27. You can get 45g of PTFE powder for $15 and 60g of MoS2 for $12. You end up only using 9g of that MoS2 with the rest of the quantities so it's basically 9 bags of Molten Speed Wax for less than $50. 9lbs of wax is going to last you ... forever.

A couple things I plan on changing. I am going to switch to using a larger slow cooker and fashioning a mesh debris catcher out of expanded aluminum and putting it at the bottom of the pot. Any debris that comes off my chain should sink to the bottom, under the mesh grate. I am also going to try using twice the amount of MoS2 than the recipe calls for to see if it can increase the time between chain swaps.

Even without the premise of saving fractions of a watt, I feel that the other properties of a waxed chain make it worthwhile for me to switch.


----------



## Migen21 (Oct 28, 2014)

I've been doing this for a couple of years, and have refined my process and am fairly efficient at it. I will touch up the chain between wax baths with squirt if I don't have time for the full treatment and want to ride. 

My experience over time has largely been the same as yours. I've gone back to petroleum based lubes (usually Dumonde light, but I've exerimented with others), but I have just become accustomed to a clean chain and silent running. 

As far as technique, I'm using the 'swisher' fashioned from a coat hanger a la molten speed wax instructions on their website. 

I do wipe the excess wax from the outer plates when I remove it from the crockpot, and I only let the chain cool enough that I can handle it safely before I put it back on the bike and immediately shift through all the gears while the wax is still warm. This prevents that initial stiffness and what little flaking there might be during the first few miles.

I also use Molten Speed Wax (rather than home brew). I don't use the additive powder. I also have a $9 crockpot I got at Target. I just let the wax cool in the pot when I'm not using it.


----------



## Notvintage (May 19, 2013)

Nope. Lillylube.


----------



## surfinguru (Jun 17, 2004)

Here’s how I do it:

Get old, used t-shirt
Liberally apply WD-40 to an area of said shirt
Backpedal chain while wet shirt is wrapped around chain
Apply some more WD-40 to a clean spot on the shirt
Repeat backpedaling routine until chain is clean
Wipe down chainrings, wipe down cassette and derailleur pulleys
Apply generous amount of TriFlow to chain
Backpedal chain through t-shirt to get any excess TriFlow off of chain
Done in 5 minutes
Go ride.....


----------



## tomato coupe (Nov 8, 2009)

surfinguru said:


> Here’s how I do it:
> 
> Get old, used t-shirt
> Liberally apply WD-40 to an area of said shirt
> ...


Yep, and the 5 minutes includes the time it takes to set up the bike stand and put your bike on it.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

tomato coupe said:


> Yep, and the 5 minutes includes the time it takes to set up the bike stand and put your bike on it.


He's pedaling the chain backwards. How about just lean the bike against some wall?


----------



## surfinguru (Jun 17, 2004)

aclinjury said:


> He's pedaling the chain backwards. How about just lean the bike against some wall?


Exactly....it ain’t rocket science boys.


----------



## crit_boy (Aug 6, 2013)

So, the wax method is $60 to get in the door plus $10-15 every time you reapply it (remove chain = new removeable link), and many minutes of heating up wax, removing chain, dipping chain, and reinstalling chain VS spending $12 per year on lube of choice (prolink, rnr), old t-shirt, 5 minutes and lube every couple hundred miles. 

I enjoy a good lubing. But, i'd rather ride than futz with my chain.


----------



## tomato coupe (Nov 8, 2009)

aclinjury said:


> He's pedaling the chain backwards. How about just lean the bike against some wall?


Sure, you certainly can do that. I prefer to use a stand -- it makes maintenance easier.


----------



## ceugene (Jun 20, 2015)

crit_boy said:


> So, the wax method is $60 to get in the door plus $10-15 every time you reapply it (remove chain = new removeable link), and many minutes of heating up wax, removing chain, dipping chain, and reinstalling chain VS spending $12 per year on lube of choice (prolink, rnr), old t-shirt, 5 minutes and lube every couple hundred miles.
> 
> I enjoy a good lubing. But, i'd rather ride than futz with my chain.


You can reuse single-use quicklinks from any manufacturer multiple times. Or you can get a Connex link (or chain) or KMC’s new removable links (which look suspiciously identical to the single-use links.)

Also waxing extends the life of the chain to the point where the bevel of the outer plates wear down long before the inside of the rollers and pins. >10000mi

As well the $60 you quoted is for a excessive amount of wax...9lbs worth. You can buy one bag of MSW for $15 if you just want to try it, then add that $9 for the slow cooker if you don’t have an old one lying around. Hell since you’re into this exaggeration thing, you should add the price of a couple of coat hangers and the watt-hours used up.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

for quaint, obsolete bike rituals, waxing chains is right up there with soldering spokes and lacquering bar tape.


----------



## Migen21 (Oct 28, 2014)

Quick links can be re-used with no issues. Wipperman makes them that can be re-used indefinitely.

I think I'm on my second bag of MSW in three years of applying it on multiple bikes.

Cost is not significant. The only real argument against hot waxing is that it's a more involved process, and takes more time. If you are happy with your current lube, and aren't interested in changing, no one is going to try to convince you to change. 

I'm pretty obsessed with my bikes being clean. They live indoors in my condo. I much prefer having waxed chain bikes in my condo than the oil lubed versions.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

Migen21 said:


> I'm pretty obsessed with my bikes being clean. They *live indoors* in my condo. I much prefer having waxed chain bikes in my condo than the oil lubed versions.


I wonder if that condo I biked by couple months ago is yours, which had 3 road bikes on hanger in the living room near the window like a decoration. 

Just being nitpicky, shouldn't they be "resting" in your condo? Because living would be when they are being ridden...


----------



## Finx (Oct 19, 2017)

Wax rules!


----------



## Finx (Oct 19, 2017)

bvber said:


> I wonder if that condo I biked by couple months ago is yours, which had 3 road bikes on hanger in the living room near the window like a decoration.
> 
> Just being nitpicky, shouldn't they be "resting" in your condo? Because living would be when they are being ridden...
> View attachment 321910


Wasn't me. I live in a Townhome. I have no front windows and unless you are adept at climbing tall evergreen trees, you aren't going to see much through my back patio door either.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

Oxtox said:


> for quaint, obsolete bike rituals, waxing chains is right up there with soldering spokes and lacquering bar tape.


In the age of expensive cassettes/chains and easy to use Connex links, it seems like a better idea now than it did in the '70s.


----------



## crit_boy (Aug 6, 2013)

> Quick links can be re-used with no issues. Wipperman makes them that can be re-used indefinitely.


SRAM and KMC say no reuse. Sorry, not risking chain failure in a 35+ mph sprint.

So, i can use a $22 wippermam quicklink to remove and reinstall my $28 ultergra chain. OK. 

I'll stick to 5 minutes of prolink once a week and a new chain every 3,000 ish miles.


----------



## ceugene (Jun 20, 2015)

Kontact said:


> In the age of expensive cassettes/chains and easy to use Connex links, it seems like a better idea now than it did in the '70s.


But that doesn't sell the narrative. Gotta misinterpret the cost of 9lbs of wax/PTFE/MoS2 + a one-time investment of $10 for a cheap slow-cooker AND add the fictitious cost of $10-15 for a new quicklink every time you use it as a yearly investment rather than what is pretty much a lifetime supply.

Also...where the hell is anyone paying $10 for a single-use quicklink? I buy them in baggies of 6 from Amazon for $15 to keep as spares. Seems that quicklinks typically outlast the lifespans of most chains.

Also it isn't even imperative to use PTFE and MoS2 powder. Plain paraffin wax is already on par or better than any drip lube...and a pound of the stuff is $3-5.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Migen21 said:


> Quick links can be re-used with no issues. Wipperman makes them that can be re-used indefinitely.
> 
> I think I'm on my second bag of MSW in three years of applying it on multiple bikes.
> 
> ...


That's the thing: time. For a lot of folks, time is not free. If you're single, have no kids, have no other hobbies, then may be you would actually enjoy waxing. But for many, they must have deemed that time spent waxing is just too much. I'll say it again though, I will start to consider when I see half the club guys show up with waxed chains. Until then, lubing 2 times/wk for a total of 10 minutes will do

I have 4 bikes living in the room next to my room (there used to be 5). They have been living there for the past 5 years. I wipe my chains after most ride, and the process takes literally less than 30 seconds. Never once did I get a drip of oil on the carpet, never once. I get more dirt from the downtube and tires flaking onto the floor, so there sits a permanent cut-up cardboard under these bikes.

My motorcycle lives in the patio and it too does not drip oil from the chain down to the floor, and rest assure the motorcycle chain has a lot more gooey lube than the bicycle chain.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

crit_boy said:


> *I enjoy a good lubing.* But, i'd rather ride than futz with my chain.


This is TMI.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

crit_boy said:


> SRAM and KMC say no reuse. Sorry, not risking chain failure in a 35+ mph sprint.
> 
> So, i can use a $22 wippermam quicklink to remove and reinstall my $28 ultergra chain. OK.
> 
> I'll stick to 5 minutes of prolink once a week and a new chain every 3,000 ish miles.


KMC makes reusable links. They have an R in the model number.

If you wanted to get more mileage out of a chain, maybe you would choose a Wipperman chain that comes with a free Connex link rather than the faster wearing Shimano chain. And you'd get to keep the Connex link when the Wipperman chain was worn out.

Or use the KMC which is both cheap and available with reusable links.




ceugene said:


> But that doesn't sell the narrative. Gotta misinterpret the cost of 9lbs of wax/PTFE/MoS2 + a one-time investment of $10 for a cheap slow-cooker AND add the fictitious cost of $10-15 for a new quicklink every time you use it as a yearly investment rather than what is pretty much a lifetime supply.
> 
> Also...where the hell is anyone paying $10 for a single-use quicklink? I buy them in baggies of 6 from Amazon for $15 to keep as spares. Seems that quicklinks typically outlast the lifespans of most chains.
> 
> Also it isn't even imperative to use PTFE and MoS2 powder. Plain paraffin wax is already on par or better than any drip lube...and a pound of the stuff is $3-5.


Exactly. 

It isn't what is going to be suggested in magazine articles, but all you need to melt wax is a cheap pot. And super cheap paraffin wax is a good lube. I doubt the whole process would take longer than 10 minutes if you just leave the wax in the pot all the time.


That might be "too much" if you never do more than drip oil on the chain and wipe it off real fast. But if you even slightly interested in keeping things clean the wax isn't actually going to take more time.


----------



## crit_boy (Aug 6, 2013)

Kontact said:


> KMC makes reusable links. They have an R in the model number.
> 
> Or use the KMC which is both cheap and available with reusable links.


Please provide a web link to a reuseable kmc 11 speed quick link. 

I cannot find it.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

crit_boy said:


> SRAM and KMC say no reuse. Sorry, not risking chain failure in a 35+ mph sprint.
> 
> So, i can use a $22 wippermam quicklink to remove and reinstall my $28 ultergra chain. OK.
> 
> I'll stick to 5 minutes of prolink once a week and a new chain every 3,000 ish miles.





crit_boy said:


> Please provide a web link to a reuseable kmc 11 speed quick link.
> 
> I cannot find it.


Then maybe there isn't one for 11 and you'd have to use a Connex 11. But for those that are using 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed there are removable links from multiple vendors.

No one is forcing you to wax your chain. If a one time Connex or Wipperman purchase is too onerous to consider, then it is simply too much for you. But if you are making a serious economics argument, you'd have to factor in increased chain and cassette life by using a better, cleaner lubricant. Pick your poison.


----------



## duriel (Oct 10, 2013)

After all of this.... Wax Chains..... NO!


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

duriel said:


> After all of this.... Wax Chains..... NO!


So dramatic. Where's the cassette floss?


----------



## ceugene (Jun 20, 2015)

crit_boy said:


> Please provide a web link to a reuseable kmc 11 speed quick link.
> 
> I cannot find it.


It’s right on their website.

http://kmcchain.us/connector/ml-11r/

hint: It’s identical to their single-use link.


----------



## ceugene (Jun 20, 2015)

Kontact said:


> So dramatic. Where's the cassette floss?


This is worth mentioning. I will never ever have to floss my cassette, wipe down my chainrings, degunk the pulley wheels on my RD, etc. I will never have to spend any time on this kind of cleaning... ever.

So again, it does seem to me like overall maintenance time is lower with wax. If I dip 5 chains at once, I’m good to go for 2-3 months depending on the season.


----------



## IvanK- (Jan 28, 2005)

I’ve used various oil lubes and Drip (wax) and while I have to say I can feel the difference with Drip, I had to switch back to oil for the winter for a reason I didn’t expect: When using my trainer indoors, flecks of dirty wax were being flung off my chain onto our basement carpet and leaving little black stains all over it. 
So I like Drip lube better for outdoor riding, but indoor for winter it makes a mess and is too hard to keep off the carpet.
I didn’t realize just how much wax flecks off the chain until I used it indoors. It becomes clear why you need to re-apply wax so often: The stuff comes off the chain like crazy. 
I’m not married to wax/oil. Just thought I’d add this to the mix.


----------



## ceugene (Jun 20, 2015)

I’m using up my big bottle of Squirt indoors because I don’t want to use it on the bike I actually ride outdoors. Same issue. Black Squirt flecks get flung in a straight line under the drivetrain. Since I use a trainer mat on top of several large foam gym flooring tiles, it’s not too hard to wipe up the flecks, but it’s still annoying. Actual wax would be easier to clean since the flecks would be harder and more gray.

On my spare/trainer bike I will likely go back to using Dumonde or RnR when the last of the Squirt is used up.


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

Notvintage said:


> Nope. Lillylube.


I've been using Lilly Lube too. Its been great. How many miles are you getting between applications?


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

ceugene said:


> But that doesn't sell the narrative. Gotta misinterpret the cost of 9lbs of wax/PTFE/MoS2 + a one-time investment of $10 for a cheap slow-cooker AND add the fictitious cost of $10-15 for a new quicklink every time you use it as a yearly investment rather than what is pretty much a lifetime supply.
> 
> Also...where the hell is anyone paying $10 for a single-use quicklink? I buy them in baggies of 6 from Amazon for $15 to keep as spares. Seems that quicklinks typically outlast the lifespans of most chains.
> 
> Also it isn't even imperative to use PTFE and MoS2 powder. Plain paraffin wax is already on par or better than any drip lube...and a pound of the stuff is $3-5.


Your experience and mine with wax is 180° apart. I found that wax doesn't last long, doesn't keep the chain quiet, and when it goes away, it does so fast and the result is chain suck. I tried it on my mountain bike and during a ride the chain was squeaking badly and moderate pedal pressure would cause chain suck.

Edit: I just want to say that I've used wax based lubes like Squirt and Smoove and they work pretty good, though not as good as other non wax lubes I've used. The wax I used that failed was sold by Performance in a metal tin and supposedly had PTFE added. I think wax by itself (with no additives) blows chunks as far as longevity goes.


----------



## tihsepa (Nov 27, 2008)

mfdemicco said:


> Your experience and mine with wax is 180° apart. I found that wax doesn't last long, doesn't keep the chain quiet, and when it goes away, it does so fast and the result is chain suck. I tried it on my mountain bike and during a ride the chain was squeaking badly and moderate pedal pressure would cause chain suck.


Something else is up. Never seen any chain lube go from okay to chain suck in one ride.


----------



## Finx (Oct 19, 2017)

mfdemicco said:


> Your experience and mine with wax is 180° apart. I found that wax doesn't last long, doesn't keep the chain quiet, and when it goes away, it does so fast and the result is chain suck. I tried it on my mountain bike and during a ride the chain was squeaking badly and moderate pedal pressure would cause chain suck.


This is not a chain lube issue...


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

Finx said:


> This is not a chain lube issue...


Oh yes it is!


----------



## ceugene (Jun 20, 2015)

mfdemicco said:


> Oh yes it is!


I can't speak for MTB and the build-up of dirt/mud/etc, but on a road bike I doubt I'd experience chainsuck with a completely dry chain devoid of any lubricant. The chain would squeak and the pins/rollers would wear extremely fast...they'd eventually rust, but chain suck should not be a thing until then.


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

ceugene said:


> I can't speak for MTB and the build-up of dirt/mud/etc, but on a road bike I doubt I'd experience chainsuck with a completely dry chain devoid of any lubricant. The chain would squeak and the pins/rollers would wear extremely fast...they'd eventually rust, but chain suck should not be a thing until then.


From http://reviews.mtbr.com/workbench-how-to-un-suck-your-chainsuck on the causes of chainsuck. 

4. A very dry chain (needing lubrication):
The story on dry chains is similar to that of muddy conditions. When the chain is particularly dry or lacking lube, especially when conditions are really dusty, chainsuck is more common.

Solution: Again, proper lubrication—a dry condition lube—helps this problem considerably. And, like above, so does adjusting your shift technique to reduce the load on the drivetrain.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Chain suck is not a chain lube issue unless you are talking about long term. Links can become stiff because of a little rust. However, if you have a link stiff enough to cause chain suck, it would be causing your chain to jump every time it goes around the pulleys. The bike would be virtually unrideable.


----------



## crit_boy (Aug 6, 2013)

Lombard said:


> Chain suck is not a chain lube issue unless you are talking about long term. Links can become stiff because of a little rust. However, if you have a link stiff enough to cause chain suck, it would be causing your chain to jump every time it goes around the pulleys. The bike would be virtually unrideable.


You are wrong. 

Dirty drivetrain and insufficient/used up lubrication is definitely a cause of chainsuck - and way before rusting happens.


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

A definitive article on chain suck: http://www.fagan.co.za/Bikes/Csuck/


----------



## greg12666 (Mar 29, 2012)

I changed to was 1 year ago and really like the way the chain stays much cleaner. It does take a little work that's why I wax multiple chains and have them hanging until I need a new one. I clean and wax 3-5 chains all at once and rotate them. They also are very quiet for longer. I get about 400 to 500 miles per chain before switching.


----------



## Guest (May 11, 2018)

ceugene said:


> Compared to Squirt...no comparison. It lasts way longer in real riding conditions, doesn't build up on the drivetrain and is a lot cleaner to the touch. I have a big bottle of Squirt that I am using on my spare/Zwift bike. Even after months of use, the semi-solid Squirt flecks that fly off my chain are black. This is from riding exclusively indoors. Squirt just seems inherently dirty to me. It racks up a lot more mileage on the trainer than it does outdoors, but I've never been happy with its performance.


I'm getting ready to switch from a Squirt-lubed chain to a waxed chain, and thought I'd clean the chainrings and cogs while I'm at it. What's the best way to get the residual Squirt gunk off the metal? Warm oven? Lots of elbow grease?


----------



## Finx (Oct 19, 2017)

Most any parts cleaner/degreaser will remove it.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Finx said:


> Most any parts cleaner/degreaser will remove it.


You're talking about wax? Hard to tell cuz you didn't quote any particular post. Yes, it will remove it but not without more work than I'd want to do.


----------



## ceugene (Jun 20, 2015)

You don’t even need degreaser to get Squirt off metal surfaces. Hot soapy water does the job...also why Squirt is s pretty bad rain/wet conditions lube.


----------

