B R H wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 5:15 pm
TobinHatesYou wrote:B R H wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 8:35 am
Your questions are irrelevant to the scenario where a chain that was quiet becomes noisy. Do you agree or disagree that a chain that was quiet and is now noisy is wasting more energy?
An unlubed chain is quite noisy.
A chain covered in sticky, viscous goo is not noisy and inefficient.
A chain covered in light, lubricious solids is noisy and efficient.
Thick fluids effectively insulate the sound from the observer. They do not prevent the release of energy that creates the sound. A thick layer of lube/wax covering the external surfaces of a chain will minimize rasping noises, but that thick layer of lube/wax is actually contributing nothing to your drivetrain efficiency.
Only one noise really needs to be avoided, and that's squeaking.
All true but funny you seem unable to acknowledge that my point was also true.
We don't acknowledge it because it's a simplified statement with big hole in its integrity.
Melt wax is quietest on the first miles.
Then it gets noisier, BUT IT KEEP GETTING FASTER as the excess wax shred off.
So, the noise wasn't there. Then the noise come, yet it become faster. This hold for about 60 miles. Then friction stay steady until about 150 miles or so, when it get even louder but gets slower instead of faster.
So, your statement wasn't true on the first 60 mile, then true later on. All on the same chain and lube setup.
Since it's only true like half the time. Why do we generalize it that way?