Chain lubricants

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.

Moderator: robbosmans

MagicShite
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 3:33 pm

by MagicShite

A little showcase of Squirt, "properly done" on my trainer.

Bear in mind this is a ride after a new application which was allowed to dry for 24 hours. The cassette and chain is never cleaned, only wiped with rag + alcohol after a new application.

No residues on the floor.
Attachments
IMG_20211126_182246.jpg
IMG_20211126_182257.jpg
IMG_20211126_182313.jpg

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



JWTS
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:44 pm

by JWTS

aeroisnteverything wrote:
Wed Nov 24, 2021 1:23 pm

Whatever works for you, but your piece of mind is my lack thereof. I don't want to think about the "should I top up the lube" question or "is my chain in need of a bath" question; I want to just go and ride. Thinking about cost per application for something like UFO drip seems odd to me - it's literally pennies each time, despite the relatively high price tag of the whole bottle.
really? It's $45 USD per bottle, and they claim 35 applications per bottle. That's $1.28 an application, that will last me about a week. While that's going to bankrupt me, it's $66.00 a year. That's will pay for another XTR chain. It's definitely not "pennies", unless you mean "a lot of pennies".

It's irrelevant to me anyway, since these lubes simply don't work in my weather conditions, but I think you're understating the cost significatnly of the UFO lube.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 9064
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

JWTS wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 9:13 pm

really? It's $45 USD per bottle, and they claim 35 applications per bottle. That's $1.28 an application, that will last me about a week. While that's going to bankrupt me, it's $66.00 a year. That's will pay for another XTR chain. It's definitely not "pennies", unless you mean "a lot of pennies".

It's irrelevant to me anyway, since these lubes simply don't work in my weather conditions, but I think you're understating the cost significatnly of the UFO lube.

For someone who rides primarily in dry conditions, wax drip lubes increase the lifespan of the chain, cassette and chainrings significantly. 2x the mileage is not out of the question.

aeroisnteverything
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 4:43 pm

by aeroisnteverything

JWTS wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 9:13 pm
aeroisnteverything wrote:
Wed Nov 24, 2021 1:23 pm

Whatever works for you, but your piece of mind is my lack thereof. I don't want to think about the "should I top up the lube" question or "is my chain in need of a bath" question; I want to just go and ride. Thinking about cost per application for something like UFO drip seems odd to me - it's literally pennies each time, despite the relatively high price tag of the whole bottle.
really? It's $45 USD per bottle, and they claim 35 applications per bottle. That's $1.28 an application, that will last me about a week. While that's going to bankrupt me, it's $66.00 a year. That's will pay for another XTR chain. It's definitely not "pennies", unless you mean "a lot of pennies".

It's irrelevant to me anyway, since these lubes simply don't work in my weather conditions, but I think you're understating the cost significatnly of the UFO lube.
35 application seems wildly conservative. I would say it's at least double that number.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 9064
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Yep, one tiny drop per roller is all you need.

usr
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2021 5:58 pm

by usr

Well, that's another resource that you either enjoy pampering your chain with or not: Chain care meditation time.

If I where the type for always going for perfection, meticulously pipetting roller by roller, yeah, I wouldn't mind a lube ten times as expensive per drop as squirt. But usually I do the fast one, steady the bottle on the cage, tip front of the roller, squeeze while giving the crank ca 2.5 swirls. Occasionally more if I feel like the tip wasn't somewhat centered most of the time. That entire duration is so short that I jokingly made a habit of not breathing while it's happening. I do apnoe-lubing. And I'm so bad at holding my breath that I'd consider it a challenge to not breathe for ten seconds (the squirt swirl is not a challenge).

The total amount applied in that process might actually not be so much bigger than yours at all (the amount per roller is not so much controlled by reducing flow but by increasing crank speed, it's awesome!), but the thought "this stuff is expensive, be careful not to waste any!" would completely ruin it for me.

Horses for courses I guess, and in this case hoses are lube products and courses are chain care habits and preferences.

I'm actually not convinced at all that there couldn't be a drop wax better than squirt for my habits and preferences, but I'm in no rush to dive into experimentation. And given the slow feedback regarding chain wear, and considering that some chains are just lucky regarding weather, dirt and care occasions, how many lives cab you seriously try in a lifetime?

robertbb
Posts: 1728
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 3:35 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

by robertbb

Tungsten all-weather is every bit as good as UFO but half the price.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 9064
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

usr wrote:
Wed Dec 01, 2021 11:31 pm
Well, that's another resource that you either enjoy pampering your chain with or not: Chain care meditation time.

If I where the type for always going for perfection, meticulously pipetting roller by roller, yeah, I wouldn't mind a lube ten times as expensive per drop as squirt. But usually I do the fast one, steady the bottle on the cage, tip front of the roller, squeeze while giving the crank ca 2.5 swirls. Occasionally more if I feel like the tip wasn't somewhat centered most of the time. That entire duration is so short that I jokingly made a habit of not breathing while it's happening. I do apnoe-lubing. And I'm so bad at holding my breath that I'd consider it a challenge to not breathe for ten seconds (the squirt swirl is not a challenge).

The total amount applied in that process might actually not be so much bigger than yours at all (the amount per roller is not so much controlled by reducing flow but by increasing crank speed, it's awesome!), but the thought "this stuff is expensive, be careful not to waste any!" would completely ruin it for me.

Horses for courses I guess, and in this case hoses are lube products and courses are chain care habits and preferences.

I'm actually not convinced at all that there couldn't be a drop wax better than squirt for my habits and preferences, but I'm in no rush to dive into experimentation. And given the slow feedback regarding chain wear, and considering that some chains are just lucky regarding weather, dirt and care occasions, how many lives cab you seriously try in a lifetime?

Ceramic Speed UFO Drip is thick enough that about one drop per roller and be applied quickly with a gentle squeeze + dragging along the chain. It takes less than a minute.

Some chains are definitely more rust resistant than others. KMC gold chains are great. YBN chains seem worse in this regard. I just noticed some rust build-up on most links of a black YBN chain that I left in my garage. It was freshly hot-melt waxed too.

Having used all of these lubes extensively with high mileage, I can say pretty confidently that UFO Drip beats Squirt in pretty much every metric except price/bottle. It runs cleaner, penetrates better, dries faster, applies easier and ZFC's longevity tests claim it is the least expensive lube to use long term besides hot-melt wax.

Now I haven't tried BananaSlip Tungsten All-Weather, but IIRC that had to be reapplied even more frequently than UFO Drip v2.

aeroisnteverything
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 4:43 pm

by aeroisnteverything

robertbb wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 7:18 am
Tungsten all-weather is every bit as good as UFO but half the price.
It isn't cheaper. Per ml price is about the same if not a bit more. It just comes in tiny bottles.

elfuinha
Posts: 926
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 10:18 pm

by elfuinha

aeroisnteverything wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 10:46 am
robertbb wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 7:18 am
Tungsten all-weather is every bit as good as UFO but half the price.
It isn't cheaper. Per ml price is about the same if not a bit more. It just comes in tiny bottles.
In my testing - Tungsten all-weather is very good but last very little, compered to Dynamic Speedpotion that i'm using now.
Also the chain is a lot quieter with the Dynamic and last 2x on chain VS the Tungsten all-weather.
Also used Dynamic Slick Wax that is 1/3 of the price also very good. on the Chain it's equal to Tungsten all-weather, at 1/2 of the price.

usr
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2021 5:58 pm

by usr

Stop it already 😂

You got me to the point of where I place my kitchen scale on the rocker plate so I can conveniently use winter months to assess the amount of squirt leaving the bottle per application. Am I the person who claimed unobsessiveness? This is a weight weenies thread after all, it has to involve a scale somewhere, right?

joshatsilca
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:52 pm

by joshatsilca

To get the results both in terms of efficiency and wear for the Ceramicspeed you really NEED the 2 drops per roller and 24 hour cure time, we learned this from the ZFC testing and also learned that if you do 2 drops per roller and 24 hour cure with SILCA SuperSecret, you get roughly identical results to the UFO 2.0 as the SuperSecret in the ZFC test was done with 1 drop and 8 hour cure (and SuperSecret is $20 cheaper than UFO).

Also of note, the TruTension result at ZFC is for immersion application (as is their AB graphene data) so don't go thinking that those results are real unless you are immersing.. similar for Squirt, if you heat it and immerse, the numbers are decent, but the ZFC data is for drip application.

Lastly, ZFC just updated their data with a review of GRAX from Allied, I've added it to the data set, it has similar issues to Squirt regarding penetration and application:
Screen Shot 2021-12-02 at 12.11.52 PM.png
Owner of SILCA
Check out my Tech Blog: https://blog.silca.cc
Stories of the Tech behind the Tech: https://marginalgainspodcast.cc

robertbb
Posts: 1728
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 3:35 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

by robertbb

Hmm.

In Australia, supersecret is actually more expensive than UFO.

UFO = $50 for 180ml.
Super Secret = $45 for 120ml.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 9064
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

joshatsilca wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 10:33 pm
To get the results both in terms of efficiency and wear for the Ceramicspeed you really NEED the 2 drops per roller and 24 hour cure time, we learned this from the ZFC testing and also learned that if you do 2 drops per roller and 24 hour cure with SILCA SuperSecret, you get roughly identical results to the UFO 2.0 as the SuperSecret in the ZFC test was done with 1 drop and 8 hour cure (and SuperSecret is $20 cheaper than UFO).

Also of note, the TruTension result at ZFC is for immersion application (as is their AB graphene data) so don't go thinking that those results are real unless you are immersing.. similar for Squirt, if you heat it and immerse, the numbers are decent, but the ZFC data is for drip application.

Lastly, ZFC just updated their data with a review of GRAX from Allied, I've added it to the data set, it has similar issues to Squirt regarding penetration and application:
Screen Shot 2021-12-02 at 12.11.52 PM.png

Any hope for a slight change in the Super Secret formula to use a carrier with a bit more surface tension? Or will that adversely affect penetration and cure time?

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



joshatsilca
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:52 pm

by joshatsilca

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Fri Dec 03, 2021 12:53 am

Any hope for a slight change in the Super Secret formula to use a carrier with a bit more surface tension? Or will that adversely affect penetration and cure time?
Thanks Tobin,
Each generation has seen an improvement in surface tension, and with Batch 3 we feel that the surface tension is pretty much perfectly balanced (ZFC tested Batch 2), we also found that we could use less carrier if our wax particle size was distribution was much narrower, so each generation of the product has been more refined in particle size as well as higher percentage wax relative to carrier. The batch number is on each bottle so you should be able to easily know which one you are receiving.
Owner of SILCA
Check out my Tech Blog: https://blog.silca.cc
Stories of the Tech behind the Tech: https://marginalgainspodcast.cc

Post Reply