Recommendations for chain lube?
02-25-18, 08:18 AM
#78
Senior Member
Total drive train friction, as determined by the unscientific, internationally recognized junior test backwards spin*, I have the lowest friction drive train system in the world.
*pre race - kids from various counties spin drive trains backwards. Junior is undefeated. Russia was close, obviously.
*pre race - kids from various counties spin drive trains backwards. Junior is undefeated. Russia was close, obviously.
02-25-18, 08:47 AM
#79
Farmer tan
02-25-18, 08:49 AM
#80
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
It is funny, it is a real thing. It is not a test, it is pre-race, ease the tension competition.
It does not measure under load friction which I care most about.
It does not measure wear protection, which I care little about.
It does measure freewheel / coasting which, for juniors, does matter as they have to coast more and are racing doing it.
I have a hub PM for that purpose. I want to see power at the hub, not what is in the pedals. I do not have pedal PMs but do have my eye on one. I expect the loss to be too low to really pick-up, but it might comparing data over time. Not sure I have the patience for that. I have a hard time doing my expenses.
Like most things in cycling, the tests work better than the calculations. I find this primarily in wheels.
It does not measure under load friction which I care most about.
It does not measure wear protection, which I care little about.
It does measure freewheel / coasting which, for juniors, does matter as they have to coast more and are racing doing it.
Like most things in cycling, the tests work better than the calculations. I find this primarily in wheels.
02-25-18, 09:11 AM
#81
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
I think the chain / cassette are at peak performance about there to maybe 2K miles+. After that (+2K or so), while still in spec, there is wear and swapping the cassette, may end up with a jump under higher power.
If something is important I'll toss a new chain on about 500 miles before the event. I can switch cassettes up until about that 2K mark. For a real big deal, it is new cassette/chain 500 miles before.
Like I mentioned, kid lubes every ride. I have to tell him to leave it alone for a few weeks.
02-25-18, 09:42 AM
#82
Senior Member
It is funny, it is a real thing. It is not a test, it is pre-race, ease the tension competition.
It does not measure under load friction which I care most about.
It does not measure wear protection, which I care little about.
It does measure freewheel / coasting which, for juniors, does matter as they have to coast more and are racing doing it.
I have a hub PM for that purpose. I want to see power at the hub, not what is in the pedals. I do not have pedal PMs but do have my eye on one. I expect the loss to be too low to really pick-up, but it might comparing data over time. Not sure I have the patience for that. I have a hard time doing my expenses.
Like most things in cycling, the tests work better than the calculations. I find this primarily in wheels.
It does not measure under load friction which I care most about.
It does not measure wear protection, which I care little about.
It does measure freewheel / coasting which, for juniors, does matter as they have to coast more and are racing doing it.
I have a hub PM for that purpose. I want to see power at the hub, not what is in the pedals. I do not have pedal PMs but do have my eye on one. I expect the loss to be too low to really pick-up, but it might comparing data over time. Not sure I have the patience for that. I have a hard time doing my expenses.
Like most things in cycling, the tests work better than the calculations. I find this primarily in wheels.
Btw. Comparing input and output could also lay to rest the age old debate over flexy vs stiff frames and how much power, if any, flexy frames soak up.
Last edited by Racing Dan; 02-25-18 at 09:53 AM.
02-25-18, 10:23 AM
#83
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
Thats fine, but you seem to miss the point of my post. By comparing input and output power you can directly measure and compare drive train losses. -> What lube is better, what chain is better, what cassette is better and so forth. I assume that is of interest in racing. Possibly you can measure it doesn't matter at all and just go with the cheapest option. It would be nice to know, rather than assume, IMO.
Btw. Comparing input and output could also lay to rest the age old debate over flexy vs stiff frames and how much power, if any, flexy frames soak up.
Btw. Comparing input and output could also lay to rest the age old debate over flexy vs stiff frames and how much power, if any, flexy frames soak up.
As you know that won't isolate what parts are contributing what. We have the chain, chain lube, the cassette, the flex loss (pedal, crank, BB, frame, hub spindle), the chain angle friction, and that just takes us to the hub. Should not forget the bearings - ceramic ones, in the BB, and hubs, the bearing lube. The pedal bearings and lube and pedal spindle. Then there is the spoke/wheel flex, the gluing/mounting, the tires, PSI and road surface.
So a simple power @ A - power @ B does not tell me much of what to "fix" - way too many variables. I have a PM at the hub as it gives me as close to the net result (less wheel loss) as I can. I guess the rest. Educated and experienced guesses, but they are guesses.
I did buy a couple of tested chains from Jason @ Friction Facts and a 5 W certified and tested chain saved maybe 4 W over a normal chain, but I think I get about that on these new chains.
02-25-18, 10:42 AM
#84
Senior Member
I don't miss the point at all. It is power at pedals - power at hub = power loss.
As you know that won't isolate what parts are contributing what. We have the chain, chain lube, the cassette, the flex loss (pedal, crank, BB, frame, hub spindle), the chain angle friction, and that just takes us to the hub. Should not forget the bearings - ceramic ones, in the BB, and hubs, the bearing lube. The pedal bearings and lube and pedal spindle. Then there is the spoke/wheel flex, the gluing/mounting, the tires, PSI and road surface.
So a simple power @ A - power @ B does not tell me much of what to "fix" - way too many variables. I have a PM at the hub as it gives me as close to the net result (less wheel loss) as I can. I guess the rest. Educated and experienced guesses, but they are guesses.
I did buy a couple of tested chains from Jason @ Friction Facts and a 5 W certified and tested chain saved maybe 4 W over a normal chain, but I think I get about that on these new chains.
As you know that won't isolate what parts are contributing what. We have the chain, chain lube, the cassette, the flex loss (pedal, crank, BB, frame, hub spindle), the chain angle friction, and that just takes us to the hub. Should not forget the bearings - ceramic ones, in the BB, and hubs, the bearing lube. The pedal bearings and lube and pedal spindle. Then there is the spoke/wheel flex, the gluing/mounting, the tires, PSI and road surface.
So a simple power @ A - power @ B does not tell me much of what to "fix" - way too many variables. I have a PM at the hub as it gives me as close to the net result (less wheel loss) as I can. I guess the rest. Educated and experienced guesses, but they are guesses.
I did buy a couple of tested chains from Jason @ Friction Facts and a 5 W certified and tested chain saved maybe 4 W over a normal chain, but I think I get about that on these new chains.
02-25-18, 02:22 PM
#88
Senior Member
I have had great luck with rock n roll gold on my bikes. Easy to apply, cleaning and lubing is one step, long lasting, low friction, chain stays clean. I really don't know whats not to like about it. Sure waxing your chain or using squirt can save you maybe half a watt, but rock n roll is so easy and fast I will sacrifice that 1/2 watt.
This is true, but every test I have seen puts Rock n Roll Gold near the top in terms of efficiency, beat out by only Rock n Roll Extreme and some wax based lubes like Squirt (drip, which I haven't tried yet but would like to) and Molten Speed Wax. I use Rock n Roll because it is easy, fast, and works well for me. That said, I will likely try other lubes as well.
Rock n Roll Gold for me since I started back in cycling.
07-24-20, 07:30 AM
#90
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
Posts: 137
Bikes: 2020 T-Lab X-3 w/GRX Di2, 2018 Trek FX-5S with GRX/Xt 1x drive train
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked 41 Times
in
25 Posts
I use T-9 in the winter as it's an excellent wet weather lube. In the dry I have been using finish line dry on my road bike and white lightning on my mtb. I'm giving Wend rub on wax a try on my road bike. We'll see how that goes.
07-24-20, 03:12 PM
#91
Senior Member
I used to use Finish Line Wet, which is basically motor oil in a dropper bottle. It was ok, it lasted a long time, but it picked up contaminants and turned black (gross), and it required a a degree of effort to clean/degrease.
I switched to Rock N Roll Gold, which is pretty thin, and needs to be applied more frequently. I usually reapply every second or third ride. I also thoroughly wipe the chain down with a rag after applying lube. It's definitely easier to keep things spiffy with Rock N Roll Gold, IMO.
I switched to Rock N Roll Gold, which is pretty thin, and needs to be applied more frequently. I usually reapply every second or third ride. I also thoroughly wipe the chain down with a rag after applying lube. It's definitely easier to keep things spiffy with Rock N Roll Gold, IMO.
07-25-20, 01:41 PM
#92
Expired Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 11,505
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3653 Post(s)
Liked 5,391 Times
in
2,736 Posts
Not enough current lube threads, got to dredge up the necros as well....
07-25-20, 04:15 PM
#93
Banned
Yes Something & wipe off the outside, under the rollers is the friction you lubricate to reduce.
07-25-20, 04:46 PM
#95
Expired Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 11,505
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3653 Post(s)
Liked 5,391 Times
in
2,736 Posts
Good point
07-25-20, 05:04 PM
#96
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,631
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4729 Post(s)
Liked 1,531 Times
in
1,002 Posts
I used to use Finish Line Wet, which is basically motor oil in a dropper bottle. It was ok, it lasted a long time, but it picked up contaminants and turned black (gross), and it required a a degree of effort to clean/degrease.
I switched to Rock N Roll Gold, which is pretty thin, and needs to be applied more frequently. I usually reapply every second or third ride. I also thoroughly wipe the chain down with a rag after applying lube. It's definitely easier to keep things spiffy with Rock N Roll Gold, IMO.
I switched to Rock N Roll Gold, which is pretty thin, and needs to be applied more frequently. I usually reapply every second or third ride. I also thoroughly wipe the chain down with a rag after applying lube. It's definitely easier to keep things spiffy with Rock N Roll Gold, IMO.
07-25-20, 05:59 PM
#97
Quidam Bike Super Hero
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Stone Mountain, GA (Metro Atlanta, East)
Posts: 1,135
Bikes: 1995 Trek 800 Sport, aka, "CamelTrek"
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 331 Post(s)
Liked 415 Times
in
282 Posts
Comparitive Overview of Bicycle Chain Lubricants at BikeGremlin.com
