Wax on...wax off.
Paraffin wax is obtained from petroleum by dewaxing light lubricating oil stocks. It is used in candles, wax paper, polishes, cosmetics, and electrical insulators.
Zio thought this was interesting. Regular blog readers have read his questions about the wax-cult and their claims about insane longevity of chains when wax is used instead of oil. Now a major chain maker is selling 'em pre-waxed and claims all ya gotta do is use the drip lube they sell. Just wipe the chain with a clean cloth they say and you're good to go. More details here.
Zio asked the "L. Ron Hubbard" of the wax-cult for his thoughts. I guess it should have been no surprise that "Friction Fiction" went off on a rant about how removing/degreasing/boiling your chain in wax is the greatest thing ever and anyone who questions this is a moron, or in his words - a "flat earther". We'll note here that NO chain or component maker that Zio knows of recommends removing your chain for cleaning, let alone taking all the original lubricant off and boiling it in wax. Most seem to warn against removing the chain except to replace it with a new one.
And let's not forget a chain (like a tire or brake pad) is a "service-item" that has a lifespan and should be replaced when it gets to its service-limit. Chain makers give a elongation measurement for replacement, saying if you exceed it you risk damaging other drivetrain components.
Zio's guess is if one could buy a pre-waxed chain and maintain it simply by wiping and dripping on some of the same wax, "Friction"s sales of bags o'wax pellets, etc. would probably tank, right?
But it got Zio to thinking about this more, ending up here for some comparisons taken from "Friction"s own website.
Zio notes the top performing drip lube in the "cost per run" charts is a product* that sells for $7.50 an ounce! Yep, ONE ounce! While the "cost per run" may not be as good as the immersive waxing scheme, Zio's not gonna bother doing that so he didn't bother with the chart showing those results.
But it makes him wonder how a drip lube that costs 68 cents an ounce and so far (3000+ kms) has netted 0 wear on a new 13 speed chain would rate?
But Zio's guess is "Friction" will NEVER test MOBIL 1 SHC 75/90 because it's not marketed as a chain lube and would quite likely put a big dent in his entire wax-cult program. And as noted above, don't forget WAX comes from petroleum so the cultists who insist it's all so environmentally-friendly vs a few drops of oil on your chain are pulling-your-leg.
Finally, there's the issue of WHAT is the economy here? A new 12 speed chain sells for around $50** online. So if you double the life of yours you're saving $50, right? Triple the life and you save $100. But if you have to spend $50 on a bag o' wax + $100 on a "system" to boil your chain in wax + solvent and maybe ultrasonic cleaning equipment to take the grease off before you can do the waxing, not to mention the time involved with it all - WHERE is the savings vs just dripping some oil on now and then and cleaning the drivetrain when you wash the bike?
It's hard for ol' Zio not to see this as one of those "Save $ by buying my expensive stuff" schemes even if the claims of chain longevity are 100% true and accurate, but as they say "your results may vary".
* To be fair, this product's maker claims it contains no petroleum products, the "wax" is made from plant materials.
**Friction claims "we have cassettes at $700+ (my t-type xxsl is $1100 aud), chains are now up to $260 aud for a t-type xxsl. Chain rings like sram red with integrated power meter can be $1500 to $2000aud+" which may well be true, but it kind of illustrates the stupidity of "saving money by using my expensive products" and makes Zio wonder what these people are doing that justifies this kind of expense? He remembers back-in-the-day special aluminum freewheels and titanium chains, but those were "world record attempt" limited-use things. Friction certainly knows his customers better than Zio and maybe they're happy spending this kind of dough and his immersive waxing regimen seems cheap in comparison?
