On Thu, 11 Aug 1994, Theodore Heise <theoheise@delphi.com> posted Message-ID: <BC3T0LU.theoheise@delphi.com> in rec.bicycles.tech:
> Victor Silva Contractor <nrd1vxs@nrd.ups.com> writes:
>
> >I once saw a study a few years back comparing lubricants. The
> >comparison was made by measuring the differences in chain streching
> >using various lubricants. I believe the best lubrication method
> >turned out to be to clean the chain in a solvent first then immerse
> >it in melted parafin. Pull the chain out of of the melted parafin
> >and let it cool. The parafin once cool does not attract any road
> >dirt since it is "dry" to the touch. The parafin also completely
> >infiltrated the links since it was a liquid when the chain was
> >dunked in it.
>
> I recently tried this method with a new chain. It is an old Scwinn
> replacement chain. So far I've ridden about 200 miles. The chain
> runs and shifts very quietly, it does _not_ pick up dirt (I ride on
> pavement), and is quite clean to handle.

> My understanding is that the chain has to redipped every 4-500 miles
> and does not tolerate wet conditions well.
>
> So far I'm happy with it. I'll post more info as I get it.

Came across this going through my archived messages. 29 years ago,
who knew?

--
Ted Heise <theise@panix.com> West Lafayette, IN, USA
. Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!panix!.POSTED.panix2.panix.com!panix2.panix.com!theise
From: Ted Heise <theise@panix.com>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: Chain lube
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2023 12:52:03 +0000
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.2308231247360.16882@panix2.panix.com>
References: <325olo$f2s@lll-winken.llnl.gov> <Cu8F68.87F@nrd.ups.com>
<BC3T0LU.theoheise@delphi.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Injection-Info: reader2.panix.com; posting-host="panix2.panix.com:166.84.1.2";
logging-data="28380"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com"
In-Reply-To: <BC3T0LU.theoheise@delphi.com>
Xref: rslight2 rec.bicycles.tech:89843

On Thu, 11 Aug 1994, Theodore Heise <theoheise@delphi.com> posted Message-ID: <BC3T0LU.theoheise@delphi.com> in rec.bicycles.tech:
> Victor Silva Contractor <nrd1vxs@nrd.ups.com> writes:
>
> >I once saw a study a few years back comparing lubricants. The
> >comparison was made by measuring the differences in chain streching
> >using various lubricants. I believe the best lubrication method
> >turned out to be to clean the chain in a solvent first then immerse
> >it in melted parafin. Pull the chain out of of the melted parafin
> >and let it cool. The parafin once cool does not attract any road
> >dirt since it is "dry" to the touch. The parafin also completely
> >infiltrated the links since it was a liquid when the chain was
> >dunked in it.
>
> I recently tried this method with a new chain. It is an old Scwinn
> replacement chain. So far I've ridden about 200 miles. The chain
> runs and shifts very quietly, it does _not_ pick up dirt (I ride on
> pavement), and is quite clean to handle.

> My understanding is that the chain has to redipped every 4-500 miles
> and does not tolerate wet conditions well.
>
> So far I'm happy with it. I'll post more info as I get it.

Came across this going through my archived messages. 29 years ago,
who knew?

--
Ted Heise <theise@panix.com> West Lafayette, IN, USA

On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 1:52:08 PM UTC+1, Ted Heise wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Aug 1994, Theodore Heise <theo...@delphi.com> posted Message-ID: <BC3T0LU....@delphi.com> in rec.bicycles.tech:
> > Victor Silva Contractor <nrd...@nrd.ups.com> writes:
> >
> > >I once saw a study a few years back comparing lubricants. The
> > >comparison was made by measuring the differences in chain streching
> > >using various lubricants. I believe the best lubrication method
> > >turned out to be to clean the chain in a solvent first then immerse
> > >it in melted parafin. Pull the chain out of of the melted parafin
> > >and let it cool. The parafin once cool does not attract any road
> > >dirt since it is "dry" to the touch. The parafin also completely
> > >infiltrated the links since it was a liquid when the chain was
> > >dunked in it.
> >
> > I recently tried this method with a new chain. It is an old Scwinn
> > replacement chain. So far I've ridden about 200 miles. The chain
> > runs and shifts very quietly, it does _not_ pick up dirt (I ride on
> > pavement), and is quite clean to handle.
>
> > My understanding is that the chain has to redipped every 4-500 miles
> > and does not tolerate wet conditions well.
> >
> > So far I'm happy with it. I'll post more info as I get it.
> Came across this going through my archived messages. 29 years ago,
> who knew?
>
> --
> Ted Heise <the...@panix.com> West Lafayette, IN, USA
>
That puts paid to the myth that this google group was ever anything but contentious; it just had more members.
>
It's amazing how much chain science has moved on in 27 years. For instance, I developed a method of not servicing the chain at all, zero cleaning, oiling, waxing and other tiresome and often counterproductive procedures advised back then and even now. I just choose the chain to have the best factory lube out there (KMC) and then run the chain on the factory lube for its entire lifespan, inside a Hebie Chainglider, which, while not fully sealed like that mythical "oil bath" earlier cyclists wished for, is a dab hand at keeping destructive grit away from the chain. The process has better than trebled my mileage per chain to 4506km, at a tooth-wheelie-preserving 0.5mm wear, which is where it is convenient for me to replace the chain at the bike's single annual service when I also change the oil in the Rohloff hub gearbox, 15 minutes the lot, once a year. That's what progress looks like, but I conducted the development of the experiment on another forum because on RBT there are too many buffoons interfering with real work to scratch their insecure egos. Others who followed my experiment have since replicated its results, repeatedly.
>
Andre Jute
A little, a very little, thought will suffice. -- Maynard, Lord Keynes*.
>
* I'm not a Keynesian, but Keynes is, despite what you might hear from those who weren't paying attention when they read his signal book (or didn't read it at all but still have an opinion -- Jesus, save me from morons with opinions), a classical economist, at worst a neo-classic. He's here for his pithy wit.
>

Andre Jute <fiultra1@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 1:52:08 PM UTC+1, Ted Heise wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Aug 1994, Theodore Heise <theo...@delphi.com> posted Message-ID:
>> <BC3T0LU....@delphi.com> in rec.bicycles.tech:
>>> Victor Silva Contractor <nrd...@nrd.ups.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> I once saw a study a few years back comparing lubricants. The
>>>> comparison was made by measuring the differences in chain streching
>>>> using various lubricants. I believe the best lubrication method
>>>> turned out to be to clean the chain in a solvent first then immerse
>>>> it in melted parafin. Pull the chain out of of the melted parafin
>>>> and let it cool. The parafin once cool does not attract any road
>>>> dirt since it is "dry" to the touch. The parafin also completely
>>>> infiltrated the links since it was a liquid when the chain was
>>>> dunked in it.
>>>
>>> I recently tried this method with a new chain. It is an old Scwinn
>>> replacement chain. So far I've ridden about 200 miles. The chain
>>> runs and shifts very quietly, it does _not_ pick up dirt (I ride on
>>> pavement), and is quite clean to handle.
>>
>>> My understanding is that the chain has to redipped every 4-500 miles
>>> and does not tolerate wet conditions well.
>>>
>>> So far I'm happy with it. I'll post more info as I get it.
>> Came across this going through my archived messages. 29 years ago,
>> who knew?
>>
>> --
>> Ted Heise <the...@panix.com> West Lafayette, IN, USA
>>
> That puts paid to the myth that this google group was ever anything but
> contentious; it just had more members.
>>
> It's amazing how much chain science has moved on in 27 years. For
> instance, I developed a method of not servicing the chain at all, zero
> cleaning, oiling, waxing and other tiresome and often counterproductive
> procedures advised back then and even now. I just choose the chain to
> have the best factory lube out there (KMC) and then run the chain on the
> factory lube for its entire lifespan, inside a Hebie Chainglider, which,
> while not fully sealed like that mythical "oil bath" earlier cyclists
> wished for, is a dab hand at keeping destructive grit away from the
> chain. The process has better than trebled my mileage per chain to
> 4506km, at a tooth-wheelie-preserving 0.5mm wear, which is where it is
> convenient for me to replace the chain at the bike's single annual
> service when I also change the oil in the Rohloff hub gearbox, 15 minutes
> the lot, once a year. That's what progress looks like, but I conducted
> the development of the experiment on another forum because on RBT there
> are too many buffoons interfering with real work to scratch their
> insecure egos. Others who followed my experiment have since replicated
> its results, repeatedly.

Doesn’t sound like a huge mileage my commute bike which is a outside pet,
and I use a wax pour on lube, I get 3k (miles) out of chain/cassette. Even
with minimal care I cleaned maybe once a year if that!

The gravel bike which is cleaned more frequently, in winter after every
ride, is approaching 5k (miles ) still has some life in chain/cassette both
are cheap as 10

I use Squirt which generally runs clean application before riding if one
remembers very simple.

>>
> Andre Jute
> A little, a very little, thought will suffice. -- Maynard, Lord Keynes*.
>>
> * I'm not a Keynesian, but Keynes is, despite what you might hear from
> those who weren't paying attention when they read his signal book (or
> didn't read it at all but still have an opinion -- Jesus, save me from
> morons with opinions), a classical economist, at worst a neo-classic.
> He's here for his pithy wit.
>>
>

Roger Merriman

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 7:09:01 PM UTC+1, Roger Meriman wrote:
> Andre Jute <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> > That puts paid to the myth that this google group was ever anything but
> > contentious; it just had more members.
> >>
> > It's amazing how much chain science has moved on in 27 years. For
> > instance, I developed a method of not servicing the chain at all, zero
> > cleaning, oiling, waxing and other tiresome and often counterproductive
> > procedures advised back then and even now. I just choose the chain to
> > have the best factory lube out there (KMC) and then run the chain on the
> > factory lube for its entire lifespan, inside a Hebie Chainglider, which,
> > while not fully sealed like that mythical "oil bath" earlier cyclists
> > wished for, is a dab hand at keeping destructive grit away from the
> > chain. The process has better than trebled my mileage per chain to
> > 4506km, at a tooth-wheelie-preserving 0.5mm wear, which is where it is
> > convenient for me to replace the chain at the bike's single annual
> > service when I also change the oil in the Rohloff hub gearbox, 15 minutes
> > the lot, once a year. That's what progress looks like, but I conducted
> > the development of the experiment on another forum because on RBT there
> > are too many buffoons interfering with real work to scratch their
> > insecure egos. Others who followed my experiment have since replicated
> > its results, repeatedly.
>
> Doesn’t sound like a huge mileage my commute bike which is a outside pet,
> and I use a wax pour on lube, I get 3k (miles) out of chain/cassette. Even
> with minimal care I cleaned maybe once a year if that!
>
> The gravel bike which is cleaned more frequently, in winter after every
> ride, is approaching 5k (miles ) still has some life in chain/cassette both
> are cheap as 10
>
> I use Squirt which generally runs clean application before riding if one
> remembers very simple.
>
So you got almost 7% more miles per chain on your commute bike than I got on my country bike? But my 4606km at 0.5mm, "doesn't sound like a huge mileage" to you? It's exactly for these careless cocks on the table remarks that I prefer to do real work on another bicycle conference rather than on RBT. I don't suppose you read my post carefully enough to discover that if I ran the chain to the full 0.75mm "stretch", I'd have done 4200 miles, 40% more than you achieved, before you uttered that attempted put-down. Shall I make an appointment for you at spinning school?
>
I'm the most casual cyclist here -- except for those who aren't cyclists at all but hang around RBT from habit to claw at real cyclists -- but you take the cake for carelessness, Roger.
>
You don't buy a new Rolloff-specific sprocket from your nearest LBS or anywhere else in Ireland, so there's not much change out of fifty or even sixty quid (that's sterling now) by the time it reaches my door. My chainring is a special stainless steel job, and costs about twice as much as the sprocket. I'm a masher who used to get a thousand miles (1600km) on a Shimano chain, its associated sprocket, and a complete new Nexus crankset, at the full 0.75mm chain "stretch". For me 4506km at 0.5mm "stretch" is an unbelievable mileage on a chain already, and the likelihood is that in throwing off the chain early, I make the sprocket and the chainring run further. In any event, both chainring and sprocket have 11,500km on them with no sign of wear.. From this experience I've concluded that aluminium toothed bits are for gullible weight weenies. The current stainless sprocket and chainring will easily do three or more likely four times the distance your Squirted before every ride bike got out of a set of transmission components. Sounds to me like you're a wrecker when even a confessed masher can beat your component mileages.
>
FYI, I've long since ceased feeling guilty at not getting the huge mileages per chain that some people claim, and fewer actually achieve, by time-consuming maintenance schedules employing magical recipes concocted from churched candle wax rubbed on virgins' thighs and melted in sunlight focussed by a thousand cushion-cut diamonds. Chains are the cheapest wearable component on any bike -- I buy the KMC X8 chains, which I like for the quality of their construction and factory lube, a dozen at a time on sales, and give some away to pedal pals, and use some. Actually, I never felt guilty. Even when I got a bike with a fully automatic gearbox as an experiment to see if it was me or the soft ali, I still got a thousand miles per complete transmission set, so I concluded that Shimano's aluminium Nexus components were at fault, not me. Getting near-enough three times that distance on a chain with my once-a-year maintenance regime, outlined above, was an illuminating experience for me.
>
Andre Jute
Squirting before every ride...
>

Andre Jute <fiultra1@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 7:09:01 PM UTC+1, Roger Meriman wrote:
>> Andre Jute <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>> That puts paid to the myth that this google group was ever anything but
>>> contentious; it just had more members.
>>>>
>>> It's amazing how much chain science has moved on in 27 years. For
>>> instance, I developed a method of not servicing the chain at all, zero
>>> cleaning, oiling, waxing and other tiresome and often counterproductive
>>> procedures advised back then and even now. I just choose the chain to
>>> have the best factory lube out there (KMC) and then run the chain on the
>>> factory lube for its entire lifespan, inside a Hebie Chainglider, which,
>>> while not fully sealed like that mythical "oil bath" earlier cyclists
>>> wished for, is a dab hand at keeping destructive grit away from the
>>> chain. The process has better than trebled my mileage per chain to
>>> 4506km, at a tooth-wheelie-preserving 0.5mm wear, which is where it is
>>> convenient for me to replace the chain at the bike's single annual
>>> service when I also change the oil in the Rohloff hub gearbox, 15 minutes
>>> the lot, once a year. That's what progress looks like, but I conducted
>>> the development of the experiment on another forum because on RBT there
>>> are too many buffoons interfering with real work to scratch their
>>> insecure egos. Others who followed my experiment have since replicated
>>> its results, repeatedly.
>>
>> Doesn’t sound like a huge mileage my commute bike which is a outside pet,
>> and I use a wax pour on lube, I get 3k (miles) out of chain/cassette. Even
>> with minimal care I cleaned maybe once a year if that!
>>
>> The gravel bike which is cleaned more frequently, in winter after every
>> ride, is approaching 5k (miles ) still has some life in chain/cassette both
>> are cheap as 10
>>
>> I use Squirt which generally runs clean application before riding if one
>> remembers very simple.
>>
> So you got almost 7% more miles per chain on your commute bike than I got
> on my country bike? But my 4606km at 0.5mm, "doesn't sound like a huge
> mileage" to you? It's exactly for these careless cocks on the table
> remarks that I prefer to do real work on another bicycle conference
> rather than on RBT. I don't suppose you read my post carefully enough to
> discover that if I ran the chain to the full 0.75mm "stretch", I'd have
> done 4200 miles, 40% more than you achieved, before you uttered that
> attempted put-down. Shall I make an appointment for you at spinning school?
>>
I get 5k or so from the gravel bike ie used in wet muddy/dry Sandy and so
on. By simply hosing bike down and replacing the lube. Which is as things
go fairly low miles for such stuff, some folks who go through the whole wax
coatings many more miles than that, clearly a lot more maintenance as well.

Snip rant
>>
> Andre Jute
> Squirting before every ride...
>>
>

Roger Merriman

On 8/25/2023 9:13 AM, Roger Meriman wrote:
>
> Snip rant

Good idea.

--
- Frank Krygowski