Chain waxing + graphite question

On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 08:05:39 -0800, SMS
wrote:

SMS wrote:
HarryB wrote:

I still don't understand what is so elaborate about waxing and I've
been doing it for about a year.

Nothing is elaborate about it, it's simply unnecessary and ineffective.

Following up on my own post, chain waxing reminds me of what some people
do for their cars, using what they believe are superior products, that
are in fact lousy products, i.e. those expensive air filters that you
have to spray with oil to actually make them filter as well as paper
filters. The same people often engage in "recreational oil changing"
changing their oil far, far more often than necessary because they
believe that their still back in the 1960's when everyone used
non-detergent motor oil with no additives that keep the dirt in
suspension until it is trapped by the filter.

This comparison reveals that you have absolutely no idea why I wax my
chains.

The best thing you can do now is to gracefully abandon the waxing
regimen, and revert to a non-water based solvent, and either 30W oil
(NOT 10W30), or better yet, chain oil. All of this is available at low cost.

No, the best thing for me is to continue to wax my chains because this
method meets my requirements. FWIW, here are my priorities:
1) Clean chain
2) Reduced chain wear
3) Low cost
4) Ease of relubing

I have not found another method that does a better job of meeting
these requirements than waxing. If your requirements are different
than mine, that is fine by me. Unless you can show that your method
does better than wax in meeting the above noted requirements, I'm not
interested in your method.

Harry

HarryB wrote:

No, the best thing for me is to continue to wax my chains because this
method meets my requirements. FWIW, here are my priorities:
1) Clean chain
2) Reduced chain wear
3) Low cost
4) Ease of relubing


Regarding the chain life issue: I just got the following article out
of my files: "Chain Wear is a Drag" by Donald Pruden, _Bike World_
magazine, February 1977.

Pruden tested 11 different chain lubes, including paraffin, by riding
them for a thousand miles or so then measuring the chain wear using a
micrometer arrangement. (Actual mileages for chains ranged from 605 to
7,443, but most were about 1000 to 1500.) He also recorded the
percentage of the miles ridden in the rain.

He computed the "stretch" per mile, then inverted to give the miles per
inch of "stretch." Longer mile figures indicate better chain life.

Now this was in the days before tiny boutique bottles of repackaged
chainsaw oil with pictures of bicycles on them, so he has no data on
such stuff. But here are the results, with application methods and
miles per inch of stretch:

Western Auto grease - carbon tet. solvent dip - 2660

Lubriplate hypoid 90 gear oil - hot dip - 2700

LPS 3 chain lube - spray - 2790

National Auto Amalie EP - carbon tet. solvent dip - 4340

National Auto Amalie, chassis grease - carbon tet. solvent dip - 6820

Mont. Ward HP gun grease - carbon tet. solvent dip - 10,800

Mont. Ward wheel bearing grease - carbon tet. solvent dip - 14,000

National Auto Amalie SAE 80W-85W-140 gear lube - hot dip - 17000

Same as above, 50/50 with Exxon Wax paraffin - hot dip - 28,000

Exxon Wax Paraffin - hot dip - 50,000

BTW, the paraffin was ridden 21% of the time in the rain. Mean for all
lubes was 17% rain riding.

He states he cleaned chains an average of every 384 miles (range 82 to
652) but says there was no correlation between cleaning interval and
stretch.

About paraffin, he says " One of the better wear-reducing lubricants
is ordinary parffin wax.... I must admit to great skepticism, and the
results were quite surprising to say the least. Paraffin does tend to
develop a squeak after a few hundred miles, sooner if ridden in the
rain. But the addition of gear oil (50/50) minimizes this. An
occasional warming with a torch will also help redistribute the
mixture. The compositoin prevents the free circulation of road grit as
well as minimizing its accumulation."

(Again, I use much less oil in my wax - maybe 5%.)

Anyway, there's some data. Maybe the modern boutique stuff is way
better than stuff like LPS-3, but there's lots of headroom before it
matches wax.

- Frank Krygowski

On 18 Feb 2006 11:13:21 -0800, wrote:


HarryB wrote:

No, the best thing for me is to continue to wax my chains because this
method meets my requirements. FWIW, here are my priorities:
1) Clean chain
2) Reduced chain wear
3) Low cost
4) Ease of relubing


Regarding the chain life issue: I just got the following article out
of my files: "Chain Wear is a Drag" by Donald Pruden, _Bike World_
magazine, February 1977.

Pruden tested 11 different chain lubes, including paraffin, by riding
them for a thousand miles or so then measuring the chain wear using a
micrometer arrangement. (Actual mileages for chains ranged from 605 to
7,443, but most were about 1000 to 1500.) He also recorded the
percentage of the miles ridden in the rain.

He computed the "stretch" per mile, then inverted to give the miles per
inch of "stretch." Longer mile figures indicate better chain life.

Now this was in the days before tiny boutique bottles of repackaged
chainsaw oil with pictures of bicycles on them, so he has no data on
such stuff. But here are the results, with application methods and
miles per inch of stretch:

Western Auto grease - carbon tet. solvent dip - 2660

Lubriplate hypoid 90 gear oil - hot dip - 2700

LPS 3 chain lube - spray - 2790

National Auto Amalie EP - carbon tet. solvent dip - 4340

National Auto Amalie, chassis grease - carbon tet. solvent dip - 6820

Mont. Ward HP gun grease - carbon tet. solvent dip - 10,800

Mont. Ward wheel bearing grease - carbon tet. solvent dip - 14,000

National Auto Amalie SAE 80W-85W-140 gear lube - hot dip - 17000

Same as above, 50/50 with Exxon Wax paraffin - hot dip - 28,000

Exxon Wax Paraffin - hot dip - 50,000

BTW, the paraffin was ridden 21% of the time in the rain. Mean for all
lubes was 17% rain riding.

He states he cleaned chains an average of every 384 miles (range 82 to
652) but says there was no correlation between cleaning interval and
stretch.

About paraffin, he says " One of the better wear-reducing lubricants
is ordinary parffin wax.... I must admit to great skepticism, and the
results were quite surprising to say the least. Paraffin does tend to
develop a squeak after a few hundred miles, sooner if ridden in the
rain. But the addition of gear oil (50/50) minimizes this. An
occasional warming with a torch will also help redistribute the
mixture. The compositoin prevents the free circulation of road grit as
well as minimizing its accumulation."

(Again, I use much less oil in my wax - maybe 5%.)

Anyway, there's some data. Maybe the modern boutique stuff is way
better than stuff like LPS-3, but there's lots of headroom before it
matches wax.

- Frank Krygowski

I haven't seen this data before, although I have seen a number of
claims that waxed chains get better mileage than chains with other
types of lubricants.

I find it especially interesting that he got less wear with straight
wax than with wax mixed with oil. But, if he was riding his waxed
chain 21% of the time in rain, that is very different from our riding.
Since we are strictly recreational riders, we don't start a ride in
the rain, nor do we ride if there is a serious threat of rain.
Consequently, in the 2 1/2 years we have been riding, we have only
been caught in rain a handful of times. So, if rain is the biggest
enemy of waxed chains, we should continue to get excellent mileage
from our waxed chains.

Which brings me back to my original question about adding graphite to
the wax. Unless I come across additional information, I will continue
to use 100% wax because, 1) no one so far has reported better results
by adding graphite and, 2) the information you presented here
indicates that the addition of oil to the wax appears to increase
chain wear.

Thank you for posting this interesting and what appears to be unbiased
information.

Harry

wrote in news:1140290001.927819.76400
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

About paraffin, he says " One of the better wear-reducing lubricants
is ordinary parffin wax.... I must admit to great skepticism, and the
results were quite surprising to say the least. Paraffin does tend to
develop a squeak after a few hundred miles, sooner if ridden in the
rain. But the addition of gear oil (50/50) minimizes this. An
occasional warming with a torch will also help redistribute the
mixture. The compositoin prevents the free circulation of road grit as
well as minimizing its accumulation."

I have my theory as to why paraffin (wax) "appears" to make a chain wear
longer. I believe if you look at the wear surfaces of a waxed chain under
magnification, you will find evidence of galling (definition: a condition
whereby excessive friction between high spots results in localized
welding with subsequent splitting and a further roughening of rubbing
surfaces of one or both of two mating parts). Galling may not wear a
chain as fast as dirt mixed with oil (i.e., grinding paste), but will
cause a lot more friction and noise.

My first hand experience with paraffin: it doesn't last long, doesn't
hold up to water, and when it goes away, it goes away fast (I experienced
massive chain suck). Mixing it with oil defeats the primary purpose for
using wax in the first place; i.e., keeping the chain clean. There are
waxy boutique lubricants out there now that work better than paraffin or
paraffin mixed with oil. I recommend trying the Teflon lubricant I
mentioned earlier in thead. My chain stays very clean.


--
Mike DeMicco

Mike DeMicco wrote:

I have my theory as to why paraffin (wax) "appears" to make a chain wear
longer. I believe if you look at the wear surfaces of a waxed chain under
magnification, you will find evidence of galling (definition: a condition
whereby excessive friction between high spots results in localized
welding with subsequent splitting and a further roughening of rubbing
surfaces of one or both of two mating parts). Galling may not wear a
chain as fast as dirt mixed with oil (i.e., grinding paste), but will
cause a lot more friction and noise.

Well, that's an interesting theory about why the chain "appears" to
wear longer. I note, the "appearance" of longer wear is so convincing
that even the micrometer is fooled!

IOW, if the chain isn't elongating in pitch, it isn't wearing, no
matter what theory you propose.

My first hand experience with paraffin: it doesn't last long, doesn't
hold up to water, and when it goes away, it goes away fast (I experienced
massive chain suck).

My first experiment with pure paraffin was not very satisfactory
either. Specifically, it squeaked soon after riding in the rain.
That's why I don't use pure paraffin. But I've never experienced chain
suck with a wax-lubed chain. I wonder if the differences might be due
to different types of paraffin (are there any?) or different methods of
application.

Mixing it with oil defeats the primary purpose for
using wax in the first place; i.e., keeping the chain clean.

What can I say? I've used paraffin blended with about 5% oil for at
least 15 years. My chain is not _perfectly_ clean, true. But it's
perhaps 20 times cleaner than any other lube I've used. Ditto for the
rest of the drive train. If I want it perfectly clean for a particular
ride, I just wipe it down with paper towels.

YMMV, of course. But be careful to distinguish between your theories
and actual experience. When they match, all is good. When they don't,
re-thinking is in order.

- Frank Krygowski

HarryB wrote:

1) Clean chain
2) Reduced chain wear
3) Low cost
4) Ease of relubing

The problem with waxing is that it's ineffective at lubricating the
chain. If you don't care about that, then waxing is a great idea. What I
do is irrelevant.

SMS wrote:
HarryB wrote:

1) Clean chain
2) Reduced chain wear
3) Low cost
4) Ease of relubing

The problem with waxing is that it's ineffective at lubricating the
chain. If you don't care about that, then waxing is a great idea. What I
do is irrelevant.

:-) Ah! Another axiomatic proclamation from our "world's greatest
expert"!

Stephen, don't you think you should do _some_ actual experimenting
before commenting on results? ;-)

- Frank Krygowski

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 06:41:50 -0600, HarryB wrote:

Which brings me back to my original question about adding graphite to
the wax. Unless I come across additional information, I will continue
to use 100% wax because, 1) no one so far has reported better results
by adding graphite and, 2) the information you presented here
indicates that the addition of oil to the wax appears to increase
chain wear.

This is a long thread for an old topic. Empirical data indicates that
parrafin wax, applied melted and hot on a cleaned chain, does work in
dry operating conditions. Work means that the chains don't squeek for
a few hundred miles and don't wear out faster. Empirically, the
chains and gears do last longer. Hot waxing doesn't seem to harm
anything.

There appears to be no advantage to graphite addition. Some waxers
believe that addition of minor amounts of oil enhances the wax flow
properties.

Technically, almost any petroleum oil and synthetics are better
lubricants and the scientists have strong arguements on bike chain
lubrication.

On 19 Feb 2006 19:26:08 -0800, wrote:

What can I say? I've used paraffin blended with about 5% oil for at
least 15 years. My chain is not _perfectly_ clean, true. But it's
perhaps 20 times cleaner than any other lube I've used. Ditto for the
rest of the drive train. If I want it perfectly clean for a particular
ride, I just wipe it down with paper towels.

Me too.

wrote:

Regarding the chain life issue: I just got the following article out
of my files: "Chain Wear is a Drag" by Donald Pruden, _Bike World_
magazine, February 1977.

Pruden tested 11 different chain lubes, including paraffin, by riding
them for a thousand miles or so then measuring the chain wear using a
micrometer arrangement. He computed the "stretch" per mile, then inverted to give the miles per
inch of "stretch." Longer mile figures indicate better chain life.

Now this was in the days before tiny boutique bottles of repackaged
chainsaw oil with pictures of bicycles on them, so he has no data on
such stuff.

Anyway, there's some data. Maybe the modern boutique stuff is way
better than stuff like LPS-3, but there's lots of headroom before it
matches wax.

LP-3 isn't even a lube. Strange that he used greases mostly, not oils.
Strange that he got 6x the chain wear from hypoid 90w as from
"80W-85W-140 gear lube", whatever that is, and 3x that from paraffin. Do
you get 6-20x chain life from paraffin over oil? I'm getting 2,000+
miles out of chains now, could I expect 12-40,000+ with paraffin?

Wax based lubes with solvent carriers have been around for many years,
and I have heard no claims about extended chain life. On the contrary, I
have heard people complain about more rapid chain and sprocket wear.

There has been conjecture that wax, while being a less effective
lubricant, is better at blocking contamination, so might be better for
chain wear overall. While I have no experience with "hot waxing", I have
used the solvent carrier waxes and didn't find any chain life
improvement, so I doubt the theory.

I can understand your appreciation for waxed chains, given that you ride
in street clothes. Your method of waxing doesn't seem too impractical,
either (torch & "crayon"). Removing a chain then simmering in a deep
fryer, etc. seems nuts.