preparing a new chain for use

[davek]

I've just got a new chain to go with my new cassette and I'm wondering what
approach to take with lubrication in regard to preparing it for use. It
currently feels very sticky to the touch from whatever the grease is that
they use in the factory.

My normal lubricant of choice is White Lightning - the instructions say the
chain should be thoroughly degreased before first application, so I'm
thinking I should dunk the chain in solvent to degrease it, let it dry and
then apply the White Lightning.

Or should I just leave it as is, with the factory grease? Is this stuff
likely to be better than White Lightning for keeping my chain clean and
lubed? But even if I leave the factory grease, I'm guessing I should at very
least wipe off excess grease from the outer surface of the chain. Right?

d.

[Zog The Undeniable]

davek wrote:

> I've just got a new chain to go with my new cassette and I'm wondering what
> approach to take with lubrication in regard to preparing it for use. It
> currently feels very sticky to the touch from whatever the grease is that
> they use in the factory.
>
> My normal lubricant of choice is White Lightning - the instructions say the
> chain should be thoroughly degreased before first application, so I'm
> thinking I should dunk the chain in solvent to degrease it, let it dry and
> then apply the White Lightning.
>
> Or should I just leave it as is, with the factory grease? Is this stuff
> likely to be better than White Lightning for keeping my chain clean and
> lubed? But even if I leave the factory grease, I'm guessing I should at very
> least wipe off excess grease from the outer surface of the chain. Right?

No work necessary. Chains are pre-lubricated with a good lubricant.
When it gets dirty you can clean and relube as usual.

[davek]

Zog The Undeniable:
> Chains are pre-lubricated with a good lubricant.

I was wondering if that was the case, but I have no idea what type of grease
they use in the factory. Could be any old **** as far as I know (which still
may or may not be better than White Lightning...).

Thanks,

d.

[Mark South]

"davek" > wrote in message
...
> I've just got a new chain to go with my new cassette and I'm wondering what
> approach to take with lubrication in regard to preparing it for use. It
> currently feels very sticky to the touch from whatever the grease is that
> they use in the factory.

Chain grease?

> My normal lubricant of choice is White Lightning - the instructions say the
> chain should be thoroughly degreased before first application, so I'm
> thinking I should dunk the chain in solvent to degrease it, let it dry and
> then apply the White Lightning.

White lightning has one virtue. It doesn't attract dirt.

It has one failing. It doesn't lubricate worth a damn.

It has one major extra downside. It is expensive.

> Or should I just leave it as is, with the factory grease?

Best plan.

> Is this stuff
> likely to be better than White Lightning for keeping my chain clean and
> lubed?

Yes, anyhting that isn't actually water is better than WL.

> But even if I leave the factory grease, I'm guessing I should at very
> least wipe off excess grease from the outer surface of the chain. Right?

It doesn't do any lubrication on the outside, and too much attracts dirt, which
is bad. But don't take off so much that the chain itself is exposed to (humid)
air. Chains are made from very non-stainless steels. Leave on enough to stop
the rust.
--
Mark South: World Citizen, Net Denizen

[Michael MacClancy]

On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 16:58:28 +0200, Mark South wrote:


>
> White lightning has one virtue. It doesn't attract dirt.
>
> It has one failing. It doesn't lubricate worth a damn.
>
> It has one major extra downside. It is expensive.
>

I don't know about that. Other people on here claim good experience with
White Lightning. If I recall correctly Guy uses it on his 'bent chain.
--
Michael MacClancy
Random putdown - "He is not only dull himself, he is the cause of dullness
in others." -Samuel Johnson
www.macclancy.demon.co.uk
www.macclancy.co.uk

[Vincent Wilcox]

Mark South wrote:
>
> Yes, anyhting that isn't actually water is better than WL.
>

Mind you, wet chains don't squeak until they are dry.

[Mark South]

"Michael MacClancy" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 16:58:28 +0200, Mark South wrote:
>
> > White lightning has one virtue. It doesn't attract dirt.
> >
> > It has one failing. It doesn't lubricate worth a damn.
> >
> > It has one major extra downside. It is expensive.
> >
> I don't know about that. Other people on here claim good experience with
> White Lightning. If I recall correctly Guy uses it on his 'bent chain.

Well, it is expensive, no denying that. It does not collect dirt. It does stop
the chain rusting. It's just not much in the way of lubrication, especially
compared to grease and oil.

It appears to have been formulated originally as a storage lubricant (ie,
protective coating). It is heavily marketed in other sectors as such.

If it's the best thing for chains, then those mega-multi-quid 10-speed chains
should come soaked in WL, but they are packaged in grease as well.
--
Mark South: World Citizen, Net Denizen

[Katanga-Man]

What about WD40? Would that lubricate?
KM

"Mark South" > wrote in message
...
> "davek" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I've just got a new chain to go with my new cassette and I'm wondering
what
> > approach to take with lubrication in regard to preparing it for use. It
> > currently feels very sticky to the touch from whatever the grease is
that
> > they use in the factory.
>
> Chain grease?
>
> > My normal lubricant of choice is White Lightning - the instructions say
the
> > chain should be thoroughly degreased before first application, so I'm
> > thinking I should dunk the chain in solvent to degrease it, let it dry
and
> > then apply the White Lightning.
>
> White lightning has one virtue. It doesn't attract dirt.
>
> It has one failing. It doesn't lubricate worth a damn.
>
> It has one major extra downside. It is expensive.
>
> > Or should I just leave it as is, with the factory grease?
>
> Best plan.
>
> > Is this stuff
> > likely to be better than White Lightning for keeping my chain clean and
> > lubed?
>
> Yes, anyhting that isn't actually water is better than WL.
>
> > But even if I leave the factory grease, I'm guessing I should at very
> > least wipe off excess grease from the outer surface of the chain. Right?
>
> It doesn't do any lubrication on the outside, and too much attracts dirt,
which
> is bad. But don't take off so much that the chain itself is exposed to
(humid)
> air. Chains are made from very non-stainless steels. Leave on enough to
stop
> the rust.
> --
> Mark South: World Citizen, Net Denizen
>
>

[davek]

Mark South:
> Well, it is expensive, no denying that. It does not collect dirt. It
does stop
> the chain rusting. It's just not much in the way of lubrication,
especially
> compared to grease and oil.

I get on OK with White Lightning - my chain isn't rusty and it's reasonably
clean. It may be relatively expensive compared to other lubes, but one six
quid bottle seems to go quite a long way. To be honest, I wouldn't know one
way or the other if it was any good as a lubricant. How much difference does
its lack of lubricative(?) qualities make to actual chain performance? Is it
making me go slower?

> It appears to have been formulated originally as a storage lubricant (ie,
> protective coating). It is heavily marketed in other sectors as such.

That's interesting. I didn't know that. Makes sense though.

Thanks for your comments.

d.

[Mark South]

"davek" > wrote in message
...
> Mark South:
> > Well, it is expensive, no denying that. It does not collect dirt. It
> does stop
> > the chain rusting. It's just not much in the way of lubrication,
> especially
> > compared to grease and oil.
>
> I get on OK with White Lightning - my chain isn't rusty and it's reasonably
> clean. It may be relatively expensive compared to other lubes, but one six
> quid bottle seems to go quite a long way. To be honest, I wouldn't know one
> way or the other if it was any good as a lubricant. How much difference does
> its lack of lubricative(?) qualities make to actual chain performance? Is it
> making me go slower?

Six quid! Six quid will buy you practically a lifetime supply of heavyweight
machine oil to dribble on your chains.

As I said, White Lightning (and WD40) is not much in the way of lubrication. I
certainly wouldn't flush the grease out of a new chain to put in WL. At least
wait till the chain needs cleaning.

> > It appears to have been formulated originally as a storage lubricant (ie,
> > protective coating). It is heavily marketed in other sectors as such.
>
> That's interesting. I didn't know that. Makes sense though.

IMO, it's suited far better to some of those applications, where the bearing
surface load is negligible and the slow evaporation of the dried WL is a
positive benefit.

> Thanks for your comments.

You're welcome. Thanks for not flaming me.
--
Mark South: World Citizen, Net Denizen

[Dave Kahn]

On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 16:59:31 +0100, "Katanga-Man" >
wrote:

>What about WD40? Would that lubricate?
>KM

For a short while. Although some people seem to get away with uising
it it's not really suitable for lubricating a bike chain. And
squirting it onto a new chain would simply flush out the superb
lubricant that's already in there.

New chains should be cut to length, connected up, and ridden as they
are. If you don't like the sticky coating in the outside I'd suggest
you could squirt a little degreaser onto a rag. give it a wipe with
that and smear on your personal favourite protective coating. But
leave the factory grease inside the rollers alone.
..
--
Dave...

Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. - Mark Twain

[Simon Brooke]

in message >, davek
') wrote:

> Mark South:
>> Well, it is expensive, no denying that. It does not collect dirt.
>> It
> does stop
>> the chain rusting. It's just not much in the way of lubrication,
> especially
>> compared to grease and oil.
>
> I get on OK with White Lightning - my chain isn't rusty and it's
> reasonably clean. It may be relatively expensive compared to other
> lubes, but one six quid bottle seems to go quite a long way. To be
> honest, I wouldn't know one way or the other if it was any good as a
> lubricant. How much difference does its lack of lubricative(?)
> qualities make to actual chain performance? Is it making me go slower?

My next door neighbour is an industrial fitter - spends his life going
around various large industrial plants doing maintenance. He has large
aerosol cans of, wait for it, 'chain grease', formulated for
lubricating roller chains. I'm planning to try one of these when my
current can of Finish Line Cross Country runs out.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/


... a mild, inoffensive sadist...

[Simon Brooke]

in message >, Katanga-Man
') wrote:

> What about WD40? Would that lubricate?

No. It cleans all existing lubricant off, and then evaporates leaving a
sticky residue. Keep it well away from chains.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; in faecibus sapiens rheum propagabit

[Pete Biggs]

davek wrote:
> I've just got a new chain to go with my new cassette and I'm
> wondering what approach to take with lubrication in regard to
> preparing it for use. It currently feels very sticky to the touch
> from whatever the grease is that they use in the factory.
>
> My normal lubricant of choice is White Lightning - the instructions
> say the chain should be thoroughly degreased before first
> application, so I'm thinking I should dunk the chain in solvent to
> degrease it, let it dry and then apply the White Lightning.

That would be sensible if you if you want to use the WL, but the factory
stuff of the thick & sticky variety lubricates and lasts well. In any case,
it's best to clean thoroughly before relubing (with whatever lube).

> Or should I just leave it as is, with the factory grease? Is this
> stuff likely to be better than White Lightning for keeping my chain
> clean and lubed?

No and yes, respectively.

> But even if I leave the factory grease, I'm guessing
> I should at very least wipe off excess grease from the outer surface
> of the chain. Right?

Good idea.

~PB

[taywood]

"davek" > wrote in message
...
> I've just got a new chain to go with my new cassette and I'm wondering
what
> approach to take with lubrication in regard to preparing it for use. It
> currently feels very sticky to the touch from whatever the grease is that
> they use in the factory.

I've got 3 chains which I alternate so I've not bought a new one for
yonks. In the old days new chains came with a coating of a substance
(cosmolene?) designed to keep the metal looking bright and shiny
during storage and display for sale. (see archive Google groups)
But it was not a lubricant and had to be removed upon installation and
then the chain was lubed with the product of your choice.
Have things changed?

[Zog The Undeniable]

davek wrote:
> Zog The Undeniable:
>
>>Chains are pre-lubricated with a good lubricant.
>
>
> I was wondering if that was the case, but I have no idea what type of grease
> they use in the factory. Could be any old **** as far as I know (which still
> may or may not be better than White Lightning...).

The stuff is made by GLEITMO and SRAM claim it is "the finest chain
lubricant in the industry".

I don't know the exact product number, but this looks likely:

http://www.infochems.com/product/productinfo.asp?product_id=58076

[davek]

Zog The Undeniable:
> The stuff is made by GLEITMO and SRAM claim it is "the finest chain
> lubricant in the industry".

Cool. In that case, I shall leave my new SRAM chain exactly as it is.

d.

[David Waters]

Same topic different slant. I have been using car engine oil on my chain
for a while. It seems to lubricate well although it is a bit messy.
Thoughts?

[Zog The Undeniable]

Mark South wrote:

> As I said, White Lightning...is not much in the way of lubrication.

I dunno...the tramps at Swindon bus station seem to get pretty well
lubricated on it. Oh sorry, wrong White Lightning ;-)

[Zog The Undeniable]

David Waters wrote:

> Same topic different slant. I have been using car engine oil on my chain
> for a while. It seems to lubricate well although it is a bit messy.
> Thoughts?

You hit the nail on the head. It works but is like treacle. Arguably
EP hypoid gear oil is better for chains because, as the name suggests,
it's designed for extreme pressure situations (like between a chain and
a sprocket tooth). Engine oil is for relatively large metal-metal
rubbing surfaces like piston skirts and cams - big end and main bearings
have even less chance of metal-metal contact, being pressure-fed after
start-up. Engine oil also has some special features such as being able
to burn relatively cleanly, dissolve soot and withstand very high
temperatures, none of which are relevant to bike chains. However,
hypoid gear oil stinks and is equally treacly, so I wouldn't use it.

There is a persistent urban myth that the rather expensive Pedro's
Synlube, quite popular among MTBers in the 1990s, was in fact Mobil 1
engine oil in a smaller and (even) more expensive package. I can't
confirm or deny this from Googling.

Me, I use 3-in-1 oil because it keeps the chain quiet and isn't
excessively sticky.

[Tony Raven]

David Waters wrote:
> Same topic different slant. I have been using car engine oil on my chain
> for a while. It seems to lubricate well although it is a bit messy.
> Thoughts?

The two properties you need are low viscosity or it won't get inside the chain
where the real lubrication is needed and non-dirt attracting on the outside so
that it doesn't pick up dust and grit to grind your chainrings and cassette.
Engine oil does poorly on both counts.

Tony

[jtaylor]

Zog The Undeniable > wrote in message
news:40c20091.0@entanet...

> Me, I use 3-in-1 oil because it keeps the chain quiet and isn't
> excessively sticky.

Um, I hope

a) it's the 3-in-1 in the blue can which says "special blend for 1/4 hp
motors or larger"
b) the stuff in the black can promotes corrosion - it's about the only thing
that can kill a SA hub
c) if it is a) above it's nothing other than straight 20-weight motor oil
for which you are paying an extrordinary premium for the teeny-weeny can

[Ed]

Tony Raven wrote:
> David Waters wrote:
>
>>Same topic different slant. I have been using car engine oil on my chain
>>for a while. It seems to lubricate well although it is a bit messy.
>>Thoughts?
>
>
> The two properties you need are low viscosity or it won't get inside the chain
> where the real lubrication is needed and non-dirt attracting on the outside so
> that it doesn't pick up dust and grit to grind your chainrings and cassette.
> Engine oil does poorly on both counts.
>
> Tony
>
>
So what do you recommend?

Ed

[Mark South]

"Ambrose Nankivell" > wrote in message
...
> In ,
> Mark South > typed:
>
> > White lightning has one virtue. It doesn't attract dirt.
> >
> > It has one failing. It doesn't lubricate worth a damn.
> >
> > It has one major extra downside. It is expensive.
> >
> Eh? It's only £2.49 for a 3 litre bottle. It's not quite as good a (social)
> lubricant as a nice bottle of wine or a few bottles of Deuchars or
> something, though.

From the tramps I've seen swigging it, I appear to be wrong about its propensity
for attracting dirt as well.
--
"To ... just not care that there are naked triathletes running
across your lawn, that's just a waste of exhibitionism."
- Kibo, in alt.religion.kibology

[Tony Raven]

Ed wrote:
> Tony Raven wrote:
>> David Waters wrote:
>>
>>> Same topic different slant. I have been using car engine oil on my chain
>>> for a while. It seems to lubricate well although it is a bit messy.
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> The two properties you need are low viscosity or it won't get inside the
>> chain where the real lubrication is needed and non-dirt attracting on the
>> outside so that it doesn't pick up dust and grit to grind your chainrings
>> and cassette. Engine oil does poorly on both counts.
>>
>> Tony
>>
>>
> So what do you recommend?
>

I generally use something like White Lightning which carries the wax inside
the link on a solvent and dries non-sticky. The solvent also does a good job
of washing the muck out of the inside of the links. If its wet and winter
I'll generally use something like Finish Line Cross Country carefully dripped
on the gap between the roller and the side plate so it wicks inside and not
too much on the outside. Resists washing out much better than WL

Tony

[Mark South]

"Tony Raven" > wrote in message
...
>
> I generally use something like White Lightning which carries the wax inside
> the link on a solvent and dries non-sticky. The solvent also does a good job
> of washing the muck out of the inside of the links. If its wet and winter
> I'll generally use something like Finish Line Cross Country carefully dripped
> on the gap between the roller and the side plate so it wicks inside and not
> too much on the outside. Resists washing out much better than WL

We are in the middle of this old one over on rec.bikes.tech. The only person
who's conducted a fair experimental test found that the longest chain life was
obtained by leaving the chain alone except for a few drops of oil. Cleaning and
relubing with anything resulted in more wear.
--
Mark South: World Citizen, Net Denizen

[James Hodson]

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 10:27:45 +0200, "Mark South"
> wrote:

>We are in the middle of this old one over on rec.bikes.tech. The only person
>who's conducted a fair experimental test found that the longest chain life was
>obtained by leaving the chain alone except for a few drops of oil. Cleaning and
>relubing with anything resulted in more wear.

Hi Mark

My own cleaning regimen - or, rather, that of my chain - is to slop a
dollop of citrus stuff into a rag and run the chain gently backwards
and forwards though said nice-smelling rag, wiping all the while. I
clean the jockey wheels in the a similar way. To finish, I squirt a
small amount of MultiLube about the place.

I tend not to let my road bike get too gunged up so the above method
works for me. My MTB-lookalike ... well, that's a different matter.
I'm half convinced that the detritus plays a major role in holding the
bike together.

Does the citrus stuff count towards my five portions of fruit/veg. per
day I wonder?

James

[Mark South]

"James Hodson" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 10:27:45 +0200, "Mark South"
> > wrote:
>
> >We are in the middle of this old one over on rec.bikes.tech. The only person
> >who's conducted a fair experimental test found that the longest chain life
was
> >obtained by leaving the chain alone except for a few drops of oil. Cleaning
and
> >relubing with anything resulted in more wear.
>
> Hi Mark

Hi James!

> My own cleaning regimen - or, rather, that of my chain - is to slop a
> dollop of citrus stuff into a rag and run the chain gently backwards
> and forwards though said nice-smelling rag, wiping all the while. I
> clean the jockey wheels in the a similar way. To finish, I squirt a
> small amount of MultiLube about the place.

It was pointed out in r.b.t that keeping the outside of the chain clean is a
GOOD THING on the grounds that there is less abrasive stuff wearing out the rest
of your drivetrain.

> I tend not to let my road bike get too gunged up so the above method
> works for me. My MTB-lookalike ... well, that's a different matter.

For the MTB, wash, rinse, repeat, apply conditioner, leave in. Well, oil
really.

> I'm half convinced that the detritus plays a major role in holding the
> bike together.

I've certainly come across bikes where bits would have fallen off if not for the
rust holding them together.

> Does the citrus stuff count towards my five portions of fruit/veg. per
> day I wonder?

No, it counts towards your bike's allowance. You have to give it 5 portions of
citrus cleaner per day too.
--
Mark South: World Citizen, Net Denizen

[James Hodson]

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 16:56:26 +0200, "Mark South"
> wrote:

>> I tend not to let my road bike get too gunged up so the above method
>> works for me. My MTB-lookalike ... well, that's a different matter.
>
>For the MTB, wash, rinse, repeat, apply conditioner, leave in. Well, oil
>really.

Take two degreasers into the shower? Not me. I use slugs and snails
and puppy dogs' tails.

James

[Mark South]

"James Hodson" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 16:56:26 +0200, "Mark South"
> > wrote:
>
> >> I tend not to let my road bike get too gunged up so the above method
> >> works for me. My MTB-lookalike ... well, that's a different matter.
> >
> >For the MTB, wash, rinse, repeat, apply conditioner, leave in. Well, oil
> >really.
>
> Take two degreasers into the shower? Not me. I use slugs and snails
> and puppy dogs' tails.

:-)

[James Hodson]

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 16:50:03 +0100, James Hodson
> wrote:

>Take two degreasers into the shower? Not me. I use slugs and snails
>and puppy dogs' tails.

In the cold light of day the above certainly came out wrong.

James