Understanding the INSANE Zero Friction Cycling Test Data!

[@zerofrictioncycling992]

Thanks so much Josh for doing a great video covering the ZFC testing, it does warm my heart that when straying into ZFC territory 12 mins becomes 30 woohoo! But still, that is about 1.5 hours shorter than what my attempt at the same would have been :) There is just one correction re interval lengths for the contamination blocks i need to go through, and as is my style - i will explain why the re lubrication intervals are adjusted for the contamination blocks - and hopefully it will make sense for all reading. For the contamination blocks (blocks 2, 4 & 6) - the re lubrications occur basically twice as often - counting the re lube as the start of the block, there are a total of 7 relubrications across the contamination blocks, vs 3 for the clean blocks. The reason for this is really three fold, 1) Most cyclists will re lubricate more frequently when they ride in harsher conditions vs clean road conditions. 2) Especially when ZFC started (cant believe that’s circa 7 years ago now I think!) - had I kept the same re lube interval as clean blocks, this would have exceeded the treatment lifespan for most lubricants tested in those conditions - in fact that would still likely be the case for many today. 3) If the test protocol simply has lubricants pushed past treatment lifespan, we don’t learn anything other than those interval lengths exceeded that lubricants treatment lifespan, and we have a separate test for that. What we want to know is does the lubricant absorb the contamination and become an abrasive lapping compound, or does it resist becoming abrasive. Does it have any ability to clear contamination etc - and same re wet conditions block. If the re lube intervals were kept same as clean blocks we would not be able to ascertain the lubricants performance in those blocks as the wear due to treatment lifespan being exceeded would mask / overshadow / cloud the wear rate re how is the lubricant performing in those conditions - so it was very important to have still realistic treatment lifespan intervals, but such that the majority of lubricants tested would not be pushed past treatment lifespan per interval to get clean data for their performance in those contamination test blocks. Whilst the test blocks were set at 1000km per block as it is simply a nice round number - it is overall better for the contamination blocks and treatment lifespans to think in hours - something I need to try to include and highlight and explain on the docs somehow without it being lost / confusing. In the clean blocks - the actual interval time (as each interval rotates to the next cog) - to do the km basically range between 9 and 12 hours. So each 1000km block is typically circa 34 hours ride time - with 3 lubrications, one at the start, and two during. Again this is a reasonable lifespan expectation for most lubricants. If a road cyclist averages 30kmh and re lubes circa every 10 hours- that’s 300km, and that is definitely a minimum expected lifespan for many. Offroad - which really blocks 2 & 4 simulate - we just don’t go as far per pedal stroke offroad, and so average speeds are typically much lower. Hence the need to double re lube interval - each interval is now basically 4.5 to 6 hours - which again for may lubricants offroad is a perfectly decent re lube expectation. Many drip lubricants especially probably shouldn’t be pushed too far past 6 hours of off road conditions before re lubing or treatment lifespan may start to get pushed (remember there is HUGE variance offroad - on persons dust is not anothers that is for sure, nor is one person average power etc - hence generally erring on safer vs pushing). So for blocks 2, 4 & 6 - rather than thinking in kms - think 4.5 to 6 hours, and in clean blocks 1, 3 & 5 - think more 9 to 12 hours re treatment lifespans and re lubes. Treatment lifespan is often what comes into play in block 6. If one looks at the test results in block 4 vs block 6 for the not many lubricants that have managed to make it to the end of block 6, one will see that sometimes there was really very little difference between wet block 4, and extreme contamination block 6, and yet for others - there is a very big difference. This seems to be mostly treatment lifespan led - some lubricants despite being hit with double the water, double the contamination amount and twice as often - it had a not very large impact vs block 4. However for others, this extra hammering was sufficient to scrub off the treatment, and if a treatment is done - its done. A clear example of this is actually Silca's own hot melt. 8% wear rate in block 4, and yet despite the extra hammering block 6 brings, it was only 8.6% in block 6 - almost no difference. Some wax is shed with the abrasive water hammering, but there is sufficient layer protection left. Compare to the lower concentration mix of the new Rex Black diamond - that was a record low 4.6% in block 4, but jumped to 35.7% in block 6. The extra hammering in block 6 was sufficient to get through that wax blends lifespan before re wax. So block 6 does bring in an element of treatment lifespan for the lubircants that make it that into test - which is not many - and that is ok as we can use that as we have an unclouded data set from block 4 to reference. Last note - just re the different dust etc - absolutely correct - the important thing from ZFC test is that it is BENCHMARK test - it doesnt really matter whose dust i use - it just needs to be able to be the same for every test so the one product can be benchmarked vs another. If your dust situation is worse (ie finer and very abrasive rock dust) - then you should pay even more heed to lubricants that show a large increase in wear in block 2 etc. I am possibly going to do another persons dust test - Caley from Escape collective might be sending his some of his apparently very harsh dust - and i can do a block 2 test with that for a lubricant already tested, and see how much worst that block 2 wear rate is for fun. Who knows over time maybe i can build a who has the most abrasive dust league table!!! K. So you always knew i was going to take the longest comment competition - but i hope that helps on some bits for the information in the vid :)

[@jeremymitchell8470]

Here Adam goes again……killing us with info! 😂 Thanks for your efforts to educate the community and save money, resources, and ultimately our most precious commodity………time.

[@Gieszkanne]

What do you think abouut the application of drip wax by a heat gun? I think this could make it work even better. A test with one already testet drip wax but applied with a heat gun would show the difference.

[@zerofrictioncycling992]

@@Gieszkanne some drip waxes like ss drip that do not have penetration issues dont really need heat unless the lubricant and chain is quite cold (ie shed, cold climate - then it may impact). for some wax drip lubricants definitely heat can help. There is just a bit of lack of time / resources to specifically run the objective tests of X lube at X temp, then X lube again with heat etc. we know from wax drips i have tested which of those have penetration issues or not, and that if yes - then heat will definitely help, and for those without - they will still typically have temp recommendation by mfg to abide - pretty much all wax drips will have issues if too cold, and just warming the lubricant doesnt solve as as soon as it hits cold metal, it will instantly cool before it can get past the small gaps to pin.

[@dogukantosun5547]

My only concern about this test is, that the intervals are too longe for many lubricants out there. I need to change my dry lube every 150-200 km. After this, I hear squeaking noise, which means the lubricant does not make its job anymore. This also can mean, that metal contacts metal directly and it wears significantly more than the first 100-150 km. For example, a chain wears 1% at the first 150 km and 80% at the other half of the test (150-333.3) km because of metal contact. You will wright in your conclusion 81% and this will make that lube look very bad. You just had to reapply lube more frequently. In this very chase, chain will have 3.3% wear instead of 81%. (Unless penetration issue). Just changing the testing methodology can give other lubricants a better chance, and create more versatile results. 333,3 km measurement interval is just too long for many lubricants, especially for dry lubes. In ZFC's tests long-lasting lubes (mostly waxes) are favored. Other lubricants have lost just before they have been measured. I hope ZFC will take my concerns about "too long measurement intervals" into account. I just wan't independent testers to be even better.

[@zerofrictioncycling992]

@@dogukantosun5547 The test interval length is in line with the majority of lubricants on the market with regards to marketing claims on longevity. if a lubricant has clear information that it will not last sufficiently long, then this is adjusted in the testing, as was done for TT race, and UFO drip v1. Should your lubricant in question have instructions with regards to re application intervals that are shorter than test intervals, re lube intervals would be adjusted, and this noted on the test. If i discover during testing that a treatment lifespan is not looking to be sufficient for the interval lengths, this is monitored closely, and adjusted, or noted - depending on how close it was to making intervals. Treatment giving up is pretty easily heard re how the chain is running. Ie when i tested finish line ceramic wax, i ended up having to re apply very very frequently - i used half a bottle just to get through clean block 1 (and even that didnt help it...). For the clean blocks - the interval lengths are between basically 10 and 12hrs of dry road conditions - something easily within the majority of products. For contamination, it is half that length. So overall - the majority of products tested have not had an issue with the interval length. And if a lubricant does- it is initially up to the lubricant to state accurately in their marketing / product claims a realistic lifespan. Ie - many will just say things like "extreme durability" or "lasts up to 3x vs competitors" etc. If they accurate state lifespan - ie UFO drip v1 stated 200km for dry road conditions - then i adjust to that. Otherwise all tests are closely monitored, and if it is clear treatment will not make the interval length, it will be adjusted and noted - but this has been barely ever, and a huge variety of products have been tested.

[@andreasolsson2336]

it is a rare treat in cycling to be able to make decisions on actual independent and unbiased data

[@SILCAVelo]

Agreed! Adam is a gem to be celebrated by all!

[@richcole3931]

@@SILCAVelo Josh too!

[@j18ter]

Unbiased? Whatever they may be, you cannot call their setup unbiased when their business is to sell the very products they test. This is an obvious conflict of interest, if there ever was one. It doesn't imply that their test results are necessarily false, or that they are out to mislead anybody intentionally, but it is enough reason for a healthy dose of skepticism.

[@MarkBradshawgreenredblack]

I think you need to explain that. Josh was pretty open about their competitors products being similarly effective, it was clear that the message was; dry lube terrible, wet lube meh drip wax good, hot melt ninja. Or? @@j18ter

[@stfu6397]

@@j18ter exactly

[@10ktube]

Turning data into information is an art, and you did it perfectly. Kudos and thank you to you and ZFC.

[@nickobec]

Hoping to cover ZFC in 12 minutes, ambitious. Resulting 30 minutes and a little of Adam's verbosity for Josh ;-) Still very informative.

[@dudeonbike800]

Wonderful summary and explanation. Thank you so much. As a 51 year cyclist who's always been a bit OCD about drive trains, the advent of mainstream chain wax products is very welcome. I sat on the immersion waxing fence FAR TOO LONG. Finally took the plunge and am impressed with my experience so far. And ZFC's published test results are pretty eye-popping. If I can realize this sort of extended chain life results, then I'll be over the moon! And I'll be smiling from ear to ear as I permanently leave behind decades of chain muck, endless frequent chain maintenance and the occasional "noob mark" on my right leg (or left on the tandem)! I'll add that as someone who was raised by a father who sang the praises of Consumer Reports, I highly value ZFC's non-biased, objective and standardized testing. Many thanks.

[@gottagetaname]

Josh, I am on your page 100%! My hack or ProTip for my non-immersive waxing is a lazy man’s dream! I take my bottle (institutional size) of Squirt and I submerge it in Sous Vide water at 155F for an hour. The viscosity of the wax then allows the wax to flow unrestricted into the smallest and neediest places in the chain. It flows like water and flows deep into the chain! I have no time or interest in the submissive practice. And behold, I am able to “neglect” my chain for lube and still get far more km’s from BOTH the cassette and chain than ever before. It is simple and easy. I ride 10,000kms per year and I do my chain only once a month…. SHAME on me. However, it never misses and it is super silent! SRAM 12 Speed ETAP AXS never misses with wax! And, it is fast! Thanks Josh!!

[@mikegreen2298]

An excellent video, Josh. I watched the entirety of ZFC's KZbin video collection eight months ago, as well as reading several of his documents, and, as a result, I have been delightedly using Silca immersive wax ever since. I've converted about a dozen people to immersive waxing so far, but I'm always very hesitant about recommending ZFC's videos and documents since, whilst clearly a really nice chap, Adam is, as you and he acknowledge, astonishingly verbose. This video will now be my recommendation to anyone interested in waxing as it's an admirably clear and accessible précis of an awful lot of ZFC's content. Really useful. Thanks!

[@jeremymitchell8470]

I fell down the rabbit hole on the Zero Friction website and KZbin channel. When I came out on the other side, I had a crockpot, hot wax and three extra chains. After stripping the factory grease from the chains, it is literally a two minute process to swap chains every other week. I’ve got several of my friends to switch to Silca SS and I don’t think they will be going back to conventional lubricants any time soon either. Thanks for a great product!

[@eniojurko]

but constantly removing and installing chain wears down quick link, which manufacturer states is a one use, so no assemble and disassemble all the time

[@jeremymitchell8470]

Recommended and actual practices can vary greatly. I’ve reused the same Shimano quick link, at least six times so far. I’ve got four different chains with their own quick link and I carry two spares in my tool bag. Every time I pop it back into place, it give the same, reassuring click/thunk as the first time. If I ever notice a difference or have an issue, I’ll reevaluate how often I change them out.

[@eniojurko]

@@jeremymitchell8470 that is good to hear.. it is smart to keep an eye on the link if something about it changes..

[@Desmo500]

@@eniojurko that may be a consideration, emphasis is "may be". My experience is that I use one quick link (unless I lose one half which I did once) for the entire chain life (13-16K of road riding), that averages about 40-50 re-waxes on the same link. I think the links keep working (click in it goes) because the wax lube is just so good that the link connectors last longer too (my opinion). Just do not buy "one use only" there are many multi use Quicklinks or do buy Connex links. This "quicklink problem comment" is a thing I hear a lot but is NOT the issue that it is painted from "my experience" or from those who immersive wax that I talk with. Dropping half the link and not finding it is an issue. In all cases, buyer beware, hence the Connex link is an option, as it is designed to last the life of the chain may be the answer to those wondering about quick link life.

[@dudeonbike800]

@@jeremymitchell8470 Oh the humanity! My chains are lasting so long today, I'm inconvenienced by having to buy more quick links!!! We should be so lucky! Business opportunity: design, market & sell high-quality quick links that are designed to be reused 10, 20, 50 times! When top chains cost this much today, higher-end quick links make total sense.

[@jcoul1sc]

Great stuff. Adam is great, genuine and sincere. His channel deserves to be bigger

[@Desmo500]

he needs an editor

[@MarkBradshawgreenredblack]

Amazing video Josh, thanks, and Thank you very much for all your work Adam (see what I did there?) Still can't get my head around cycling websites saying waxing is too much effort, did they forget how long they spent constantly degreasing and reapplying? I'm a 'tight' northerner, modern chain waxes mean I spend less, and spend less time faffing. It's an all-round win.

[@CatManDoSocial]

Thanks so much for doing this Josh. I watch everything both you and Adam at ZFC put out and this was extremely helpful. There was a lot of nuance in the ZFC chart that I wasn't aware of. I'm overwhelming happy with my Silca Secret Chain Blend immersive wax and it makes me smile looking at the block 6 results. I know I'm doing my drivetrain right. Bravo.

[@CMneilB]

Really excellent useful video Josh. Of course I am using Super Secret hot melt on my X01 chains. Many times the drivetrain life of my old Finish Line Cross Country (wet) lube. It makes SO much sense now even a GX cassette is well over £200. Appreciate your work and evangelism.

[@SILCAVelo]

Thanks Neil!

[@stevenleffanue]

Best video you've put out on the subject so far Josh. 👌

[@jacobatherton8339]

A lot of knowledge about lubes and chain maintenance in a ~30 minute video. I've learned a lot

[@ffjim]

Great ex[planation of the test protocols, I had not realized for example the reapplication interval every 333K was in the process. Block 6 sounds like its riding in mud! I should say the way you recommend competitors products in your presentations is kind of awesome ! I am a convert to SS so this was really helpful

[@xuchenglin6256]

Thanks a lot for this video! I have tried to read the ZFC pdf a lot of times before but just can't fully understand those things. Now everything makes sense. However I want to contribute some of my own experience about this subject. Before I started to look into this lube thing, I was influenced by the marketing that the Finish Line is the best thing and for my condition I need the dry lube. During that time, I ride hard, I maintain it carefully, I wash the bike very frequently, but all my DA chains only lasts about 3000 km, however that aligns well with other people in forums and shopping site reviews. I though I was on the right course and chains become a frequent consumerable is a badge for "serious cycling" and training hard -- only noobs ride a chain forever. Remember that's already a progress -- before that my stock KMC chain only lasts about 2000 km or so, the DA chain's 3000 KM is already a 50% improvement and you can't call it unimpressive. I told myself OK I get it, normal chain 2000km, DA chain 3000K. 2x price for 50% improvement, fair game. However, later when that Finish Line dry lube ran out -- that red bottle cap one. I find myself a bottle of dirt cheap left over Decathlon wet lube from a bike trip, costs about $5. I think well, it's better not waste things. Then that became my lube. I'm on my 3rd DA chain and I ride and ride and ride, but every time I thought well it should be the time to change the chain, but chain checker said no it's not Time and time again (I record almost all my rides, and use the "tool" feature on Garmin to track component mileage), the chain checker just won't fall in. I almost get suspicious that was it my chain checker that becomes faulty? No it's not. As of just minutes ago as I checked, it's approaching 5000 km and that chain checker still won't fall in. And what's more surprising is before I don't even know the new 0.5% rule for 11 speed and 12 speed, as my chain checker only has 0.75 and 1.0, and I always use 0.75 as the change criterium. That means the 2000 km for normal and 3000 km for DA is all at 0.75% not the intended 0.5% even. That's what I get with the Finishline Dry lube, at pretty good dry conditions, wash and re-lube often. This is how bad the FinishLine Dry lube is. And accoriding to a lot of people on the forums or so, the victims are huge. And that wear rate almost becomes a new norm. It's only lately that I looked into this stuff and suddenly realized that oh I think I got tricked by the FinishLine marketing stuff and that super cheap left over Decathlon wet lube is better, and I not only did not get the marketing claimed benefits of the dry lube, but also lost a whole lot of the life of my good DA chains! Now looking at all these data, everything started to make sense. The take away message to add, besides that wax lube are the best, is that you can and should get a decent lifespan of your chain, let's say, 5000KM or so, with just very normal very plain wet lube, if you just wash and lube it properly. No reason to let your chain go through the testing conditions, and you can hugely improve the lifespan just but wash it often.

[@hardmtnbiker]

Thanks for your analysis/translation Josh. As you probably already guessed, I use Silca’s Super Secret Blend Wax. Obviously marginal gains are not greatest with an old chain that has been used for years. So just replace a chain with a new chain and wax it with Silca instead, something fundamental and logical.

[@cyruse7027]

Wow, thank you for breaking this down!

[@johnfarr5415]

1:41 @Josh - "I just want to do a 12ish minute" 🤣😂

[@MrUberboss]

31:30 also @josh - "I'll save because we just hit 30 minutes. My camera just shut off, I had to restart it." Is this actually Josh talking or is it Adam? 😂

[@SILCAVelo]

Ha! I said the same thing after filming this.. Adam is rubbing off on me!!

[@stephenmcateer4243]

Great unbiased informative vid, thanks for that

[@AdamOHalloran]

Thanks Josh - that is a very helpful video - I regularly watch Adam's videos, but sometimes I find myself wondering what is the right way to go and how often I should be re-applying my wax. Two questions for you: 1) What is your recommended re-application distance and 2) if you were bikepacking on mixed roads (gravel & tarmac), what would you recommend to keep the chain lubricated?

[@Desmo500]

I replied to yumyumhungry above, but here it is again...my experience... "Maybe, consider having two chains and a ziplock bag. I do. I swap out the chain after 3-400km or sooner if wet, give the dirty chain a quick wash in warm water to remove any mud, dry, apply drip wax, put into the ziplock and keep the chain in a warm place overnight. On the second use of the chain, swap out at 1-200 km, "wash, rinse, dry, drip-lube, repeat". Not an arduous task. Again, works for me, may not for you. I do not get super dirty hands if I have a flat or changing the chain (cleanliness is a big thing for me)."

[@glensmall1]

Fantastic video. Makes me extra happy that I'm using Silca hot melt 😊

[@yumyumhungry]

As an ultra distance bikepacker I think I'm a niche case where sometimes you are spending a week or more riding in and out of the wet. While wax might perform better than a wet lube across a single ride, the wet lube can actually be reapplied, where the wax emulsion will just go with the rest of the water. I was trying to use a wax emulsion based lube during the tour divide and it was UGLY. By the time I hit Steamboat not only did I need to replace the chain, but also the chainring and cassette as well.

[@Desmo500]

Maybe, consider having two chains and a ziplock bag. I do. I swap out the chain after 3-400km or sooner if wet, give the dirty chain a quick wash in warm water to remove any mud, dry, apply drip wax, put into the ziplock and keep the chain in a warm place overnight. On the second use of the chain, swap out at 1-200 km, "wash, rinse, dry, drip-lube, repeat". Not an arduous task. Again, works for me, may not for you. I do not get super dirty hands if I have a flat or changing the chain (cleanliness is a big thing for me). Thing is, if you are using wet lube on a chain, it is building up the black grinding paste, so I cannot see how the chain lasts in those situations; never did for me.

[@AllanHundeboll]

I'm wondering if oil based lubricants like silca synergetic prevents chain rust better than wax based lubricants if you frequently ride in wet conditions and have to park your bike outside?

[@SamuelBlackMetalRider]

What would we do without Josh? Absolutely LOVE Synergetic. But apart from that SRAM RED Cassette is $350 and chain is $60 let’s not exaggerate those prices hahaha

[@SILCAVelo]

MSRP For Red AXS is $377 and $75 so let's not underexaggerate either ;-) Seriously, though, the T-Type XX Eagle cassette has an MSRP of $600 and the chain $150!

[@dudeonbike800]

@@SILCAVelo These are getting so expensive, it's probably just better to stop riding them. Amiright???

[@AllanHundeboll]

Yes unless you are a dentist.

[@pauljogever3282]

Thanks for the summary of ZFC's work, he's a legend. I have started using your Secret Chain Blend, was using Muc Off Ceramic re applying after every second ride. I have seen the light!

[@braz46]

Josh - When hot wax reapplied during the tests 2 thru 6, is the wax the same batch which would start to have the contaminants mixing in the hot melt. I presume chains are not wiped before reapplication.

[@KostaK-m1n]

Great explanation and analysis. Really appreciate not over-hyping your own products! Based on the data, I was wondering what your recommendation would be in regards to using the Effetto Mariposa Flower Power drip was in between Silca Hot Melt wax applications.

[@SILCAVelo]

Flower Power is great stuff in terms of it's single application longevity, but it uses a bit of oil content to help achieve this.. which is why is gets much dirtier than SuperSecret or UFO (as noted also by ZFC). If using FP drip, you really need to clean the chain more completely before putting it into your hotwax as the oil content and trapped dirt are both bad for hot wax. I might consider a boiling water clean and then an acetone or denatured alcohol rinse to try and remove the residual FP oil.

[@kostak2171]

@@SILCAVelo thanks so much!

[@JoPaSantos]

​@@SILCAVeloExactly what I did to reapply Effetto Mariposa and it seemed to come out very clean

[@Marltiod]

Finally tried the hot wax + super secret chain lube combo. I like the cleanliness of the drivetrain. However, there is some things to take note. The links must be broken before your first ride. The chain will take some time to break in. In my case, the chain is not quieter than a normal lube, I would even say its a little bit louder. This is on a brand new dura-ace 11 speed chain. Maybe I will try with a Red 22 chain to see the difference. As for a "faster chain" its of course not noticeable.

[@AllanHundeboll]

Run first 100km with the factory grease then strip/clean and apply hot wax. The factory grease effectively picks up any metal debris left from manufacturing.

[@robbeattie3785]

v v good mate ... just wot I needed

[@bigglesm3456]

great “10” 30 minute video Josh!!!! 😂 … seriously, fantastic explanation, revisiting my lubricant strategy for CX, rest including the wife’s are all wax … this weekend is wax weekend in my workshop

[@albertdee1139]

Thanks Josh, I was especially curious about using Silca Hot Melt in the rain and was going to ask (although I did not do it) do you have any feedback how those who used the Silca Hot Melt in this years rainy RAIN ride felt about their choice of Lube (that's 162 mles in wet if not very wet conditions)?

[@slowcyclist4324]

Silca wax is indeed good, however it’s just on par with other mainstay like MSW. Rex hot melt though, that’s a whole new ball game. Not gonna lie I’m completely sold on Rex hot melt. 1000km b4 each rewax in dry condition is a game changer

[@davet003.5]

Rex 4+1 wouldn’t work for me because I ride in wet & dirt most of the year and the stats aren’t as good as Rex 11+1. I am good with the older MSW mainly because I have a shit ton of it in my crock pot and the newer waxes aren’t cheap. SHM seems equivalent to MSW. I have read that the new super waxes take some time breaking in but I am waiting for my stash of MSW to get used first so I can’t confirm it the break in period is a deal breaker.

[@Desmo500]

wow, 1000km! Maybe I am re-waxing too soon(my average is 320km). I did once leave the chain on for 500km and it was not making noises, but I felt antsy about it... How long does the chain last (I accept this is dry weather riding, not a problem really)?

[@ShawnIsBatman]

Silca + ZFC = both are the best in the industry! I was a ProLink/ProGold user for years, moved to Silca Synergetic last year. As I began to see the real benefits of waxing and saw through the "waxing is too much of a hassle bs", I became a wax convert using Silca Hot Melt along with Super Secret top-off treatments. I could not be more pleased with the product and its performance.

[@michaelbigarelli2197]

Great video, as usual. In your videos on applying drip wax you are very specific on the best I.e, worst, chain li e to open up the links and allow the lube to penetrate. Does Adam follow the same protocol? It could be relevant to those with an IP in block 1?

[@raphindahouse]

awesome. got some key learnings out of it!

[@emilgercke2132]

Excellent!

[@makantahi3731]

19:57 yes, there is, ordinary wax, when hot waxing is done with an inductive heater, the first pass washes off the external dirt and fills the inside of the chain with wax that comes out of the chain for the most part and takes the internal dirt with it when wiping with a cloth, in the second pass the same thing happens and the chain is cleaned even more, so the amount of impurities that remain in the chain is drastically reduced

[@cyclingjack]

Love the shirt!!

[@RT-tn4ry]

I use Squirt. I take the chain off thoroughly clean and boil it in water to clean all old wax and dirt off. Sit it on a heater to totally dry. Then lay on a flat table when warm and work Squirt in with a toothbrush, works great ! Im retired so time is no issue !

[@AllanHundeboll]

Boiling makes sense. But working with toothbrush seem inefficient vs immersive hot wax...

[@RT-tn4ry]

@@AllanHundeboll The working it in with the tooth brush takes 1/10 the the time of all the waxing !!!

[@AllanHundeboll]

@@RT-tn4ry If you already have chain removed from bike dipping in hot waxe is a 5sec action, a coffee break with chain submerged and 5secs to withdraw chain from wax. Toothbrush seems fiddle compared and surely not as effective getting inside the rollers....

[@brucelulu829]

Excellent info on the optimal chain treatments. When you have a new, clean, prepared chain, should any lube be directly applied to the chainrings and cassette? Pulley wheels?

[@SILCAVelo]

No need to lube the rings or cassette, however, a lot of people, myself included do like to do a SuperSecret application on the chain, and then run it through all the gears to get a little coating on them. It doesn't make it any faster from all the testing we've done, but it does make it very quiet!

[@brucelulu829]

Fascinating!

[@kaberg92]

What is the reasoning around running the factory lube at all? Is it the benefit of grinding/rounding of metall imperfictions of the new chain and then removing the lube along with the particulates? Selling bikes it seems easier to offer the wax service at point of sale rather the later. What would be your take on the matter? Thank you for a great video!

[@SILCAVelo]

There is a slight benefit to pre-running the chain a bit, or you can strip it, run it lightly, and then wax it, the key is to debur the interior of the chain and potentially remove any little excess metal bits. This will also happen in time with waxing, but as the wax is so much more protective, it takes longer.

[@bootstraps1]

Are there any use cases where synergetic is better than hot or drip wax? I've converted my road bikes to secret chain blend, but was hesitating on my mountain bikes because 1. I didn't think I could get my chain clean enough and 2. I've heard rust can be an issue with wax and I get my mtb/fat bike wet from splashing through creeks and snow. Would wax still be better than synergetic without a really deep clean (I tried UFO on my used road bike chains and still ended up just buying new ones)? From the wet con testing maybe rust isn't an issue?

[@SILCAVelo]

Synergetic is really only better than wax if you can't clean/strip the chain after a wet condition ride, or if you are constantly in wet conditions with limited options for re-lube of the chain. If you think of the ZFC data, Adam's recommendations are to relube every 300km OR after every wet ride.. so if you can't reset the chain after every wet ride, then Synergetic is best for you and you need to just wipe, clean, and re-lube after every wet ride with the Synergetic.

[@Gieszkanne]

@@SILCAVelo What some do is give the chain hot wax the first time with propper preparation and than just top lube with drip wax the next time.

[@Thomas-fy9yc]

Of course is teasing us with silca unreleased glow in the dark bibs while doing this video.

[@joshuadohmen]

I wouldn't recommend to ride the factory grease at all. It messes up the whole drivetrain. You have to clean the pulleys, the chainrings, the cassette and everything. Just put it in the jar right away

[@TheRokko66]

Very interesting video! So that means that 100% wear in the table is when a chain lengthens up to 1%?

[@Desmo500]

Normal out of use by, is 0.5% of chain length, see the various tools (eg park tools, etc). So 100% in the chart, is 0.5% of chain length. I hope this helps.

[@JanBusc]

Is there any way to determine when the chain needs to be reset through cleaning and reimersing in hot melt wax? I've been playing it by ear, but now you've made it clear, that that the sound is not a good indicator.

[@SILCAVelo]

I still just go by sound, or by week.. the sound isn't necessarily the best indicator of a necessary rewax, but it's pretty good and it will start to sound a bit tippy tappy before it truly needs rewaxing, so doing it when you hear it always guarantees that you're out ahead of any breakdown in the wax. We're spoiled here at the office that we are waxing chains in production 3-4 days a week, so even if I don't hear the chain, I'll throw it in on Friday just to be sure that it's nice and quiet and perfect for the weekend.. you can't do it too frequently!

[@CaesarrrZ]

Currently testing super secret chain drip for the first time. Moved from Dry Fluid. So far not extremely convinced.. everybody talks about clean chain and less contamination… After ever ride, the chain is extremely dirty.. if I pull it through a microfiber or Silca wipe, it’s just so much black dirt.. no matter how long I am trying to wipe it clean. Also in between the chain links, there is a lot of grease or contamination… maybe the wax.. nothing is really clean. Used a new Dura Ace chain, stripper and 3 times super secret drip..

[@SILCAVelo]

The SuperSecret Wax dries to a dark grey color due to the WS2 additive. You need to apply it, wipe it, and let it dry. Anything you wipe off after that is just dried wax.

[@beams2002]

also... the drip wax is meant to be used well before riding. best when the liquid penetrates, and then evaporates leaving the wax behind. if you ride immediately after application, you lose the wax advantage - more contamination in the lube, and less wax where you need it.

[@CaesarrrZ]

@@SILCAVelo that is what I did but after every ride its there is a lot to wipe again..

[@CaesarrrZ]

@@beams2002 that is clear.. I waited 24h after every application...

[@glennmorgan8691]

Great job as usual Josh!!! I was wondering for eg,if block 3 shows 30%wear is that adding in the wear from block 1 and 2 or is it 30% wear just in that block 3?Also are you guys tweaking the wax x formula?Thanks again Josh!!!Cheers!!

[@adamolig3865]

The full data file on ZFC site has the data both ways. One table is in cumulative wear as % of full 0.5% wear ("stretch"). Another table lists the wear from each test block. You can look at it both ways! Very clever and thorough, gotta love it

[@glennmorgan8691]

@@adamolig3865 Thanks so much for clearing that up for me and yeah very clever indeed!!!

[@oscalcmen]

I have a question, is it really uniform the chain wear or quick links are the most wear part (including links next to quick link) using wax? When a chain is waxed a thick cover of wax is all over the chain as expected, also covering the quick link, when this quick link is attached to the chain, most of the wax is removed due to the thickness of the wax, and reduced tolerance of the links, the remaining wax covering the quick link rods and links holes is minimal. This happens also once the chain is installed and exercised over all the cogs and chainrings, lots of wax is removed.

[@Desmo500]

often not stated, is that you do NOT want a lot of wax on the outside, the thinest of layers is more than enough, hence wipe chain after removal from hot wax and after hanging briefly. Wax must be on the between metal surfaces, ie inside. Even pushing the Quicklink through the chain inner plate etc, is removing excess wax, it leaves more than enough for the lubrication. There is not much room inside the chain between the inner surfaces yet the wax works as it coat the surface, more is a waste.. However if that bothers you, maybe use a connex link and the problem is solved (I would prefer that Connex links were cheaper but the best costs, absolute classic design).

[@tonystyles806]

I have been using a basic hot wax formula where I immerse my chain in a 10:1 ratio of paraffin wax and PTFE powder. Based on your knowledge, how would this stack up with the silica hot wax? Edit: I should mention, I followed the recommended process for stripping the factory grease from a brand new chain.

[@SILCAVelo]

Original MSW was a similar ratio or PTFE plus molybdenum disulfide in paraffin, and HotMelt was 4x better in the ZFC test. This is actually one of the things we're very proud of, PTFE is both toxic and cancer causing, and our non-toxic WS2 additive is significantly better for friction, wear, and the environment, in fact, it's so good that MSW and others have reformulated to formulas very similar to our own.

[@tonystyles806]

@@SILCAVelo thanks for the response. Once get through my home brew, I’ll buy the good stuff from silica!

[@AllanHundeboll]

If look at zfc data candle wax (parafin) is not so bad. Drivechain on my old 2x11 speed road bike is cheap so on this bike I use inexpensive candle wax. So far seems fine and without additives it's white so my fingers remain 100% clean when touching the drivechain. On my new carbon bike with 2x12s di2 I use molten speed wax. This leaves my fingers a little gray.

[@RefRMart10]

Super secret or syngeretic?? I can’t decide!! Mostly dry but occasional days roads will be wet with puddles.

[@dogukantosun5547]

My only concern about this test is, that the intervals are too longe for many lubricants out there. I need to change my dry lube every 150-200 km. After this, I hear squeaking noise, which means the lubricant does not make its job anymore. This also can mean, that metal contacts metal directly and it wears significantly more than the first 100-150 km. For example, a chain wears 1% at the first 100 km and 80% at the 100-333.3 km because of metal contact. You will wright in your conclusion 81% and this will make that lube look very bad. You just had to reapply lube more frequently. In this very chase, chain will have 3.3% wear instead of 81%. (Unless penetration issue) Just changing the testing methodology can give other lubricants a better chance, and create better testing. 333,3 km measurement interval is just too long for many lubricants, especially for dry lubes. In ZFC's tests long-lasting lubes (mostly waxes) are favored. Other lubricants have lost just before they have been measured. I hope ZFC will take my concerns about "too long measurement intervals" into account. I just wan't independent testers to be even better.

[@SILCAVelo]

Since we already know that dry lubricants test much higher in friction, it doesn't make too much sense to bias the entire test toward the group of lubricants that have both the highest friction AND the highest wear. I believe you are correct that shorter intervals would make dry lubricants look better than they do, but it would also make the other, more modern lubricants also look much better than they do. When you also consider that 'Dry' lubricants are all made from combinations of toxic, high VOC carriers filled with also toxic and cancer causing PFAS materials as the 'lubricant', while many of the top performing wax based lubricants can practically be eaten.. It makes even less sense to bias the testing toward the more toxic products. My honest hope is that ZFC testing and the interest in modern lubricant tech helps force the Dry lubricant manufacturers to modernize and begin producing less harmful, less toxic products that also work better both in terms of friction, longevity, and drivetrain wear.

[@dogukantosun5547]

​@@SILCAVelo Thank you for sharing your opinion. Bad-tested lubricants on ZFC's list perform better in reality than the test results. I used muc-off for around a year. Despite being messy, the chain lasted much longer than test results. They are not the best, but better than ZFC's test. It looks like the test is biased towards wax and must be biased towards reality. Muc-off is being used by a number of riders, and they don't change their chain every 9-10 rides (10.7% wear in every 100km according to the test (not even in wet conditions)). If this is a chase in test results, then it doesn't represent reality. The second most important flaw of this test is, that he doesn't clean the chain regularly. He only adds more and more contamination. In reality, people clean their drivetrain. This is another bias towards waxes, as they attract less dirt. Conclusion of my points: +I agree with you about the risks of dry lubes. +I don't like Muc-off as messy. +Waxes are good, but others are not that bad against waxes in reality. +Test results do not represent reality, as ZFC does not clean the chain like in reality. Lubes turn into a friction paste if you don't clean it regularly and only add more lube.

[@jamesrosar3823]

Wow, where I’ve come from (@ NYC,) the folks I rode with were exceptional to regularly wipe and lube their chains, let alone remove and clean the entire drivetrain more than once a year. A “clean” chain was black and oily, but not chunky! Such attention is still exceptional. ZFC is recommending more than typical attention to drivetrain maintenance.

[@OUTDOORS55]

Exactly the blocks are too long.

[@AllanHundeboll]

​@@dogukantosun5547I don't believe your statement that most people really clean their drivechain and reapply more frequently than zfc test method. Looking at drivechains on a random cycle parking facility clearly shows that "ordinary" people don't really care about their drivechain. And please don't suggest changing the test to make bad products look less bad. A test that promotes development of even better products surely is consumers interest.

[@robertwhyte3435]

What do you think of using a light duty steam cleaner to go over the drivetrain before applying drip wax?

[@SILCAVelo]

Steam is unlikely to be helpful, we know that a little bit of warmth is beneficial, but it can be as little as leaving the bike in the sun for a bit.

[@draugmithrin]

With drip wax when cleaning bike I boil chain in old frying pan then dry and warm it in the hot dry pan, apply lube before chain cools.

[@Gieszkanne]

Great video. Good advice to get the drip wax deeper into the chain by a heat gun. Would be interesting to know how he applied the drip wax in this test. You say he applied it as recommended from the manufacturer. Effetto Mariposa Flowerpower Wax (which is also a drip wax) and UFO Drip did much better than Squirt or Smoove. But from the detailed test protocols of each single lube he applied none of the drip waxes with a heat gun or hair dryer. Even not your own Silca Super Secret Drip. He cited the manufacturers description there. Maybe you got that idea later.

[@SILCAVelo]

No, sorry for the misunderstanding, the point is that the FrictionFacts data showing low friction for Smoove and Squirt both use heat and immersion to get those lubes to fully penetrate. ZFC discusses this in his reports on both, that if you used heat they might test better, but using them as-is, they do not penetrate fully and therefore don't work very well, in the ZFC testing he follows manufacturers instructions. SILCA SuperSecret solved this penetration problem with a new type of emulsion process making it the very first ever drip wax to fully penetrate, see his report on this in the SuperSecret report where he discusses in depth. Since them, CeramicSpeed has reformulated to use a process similar to ours and other manufacturers like Effetto Mariposa have followed suit, however, Squirt and Smoove are unchanged and will not penetrate without heat.

[@Gieszkanne]

@@SILCAVelo In his video "Episode 21 Lubricant Choice Guide" I just watched he said that the 19,1% of squirt in the first run is from simple applying it and he did got it down to 10% after applying it with heat.

[@SILCAVelo]

Yes, this is my point in the original video, old school tech like Squirt and Smoove require heat to penetrate, new-school tech (innovated by SILCA and copied by all the others) does not.

[@blackfoot2304]

So for a 40 mile ride on a mountain bike in Alaska where there will be some water crossings and mud but on a "dry day", would you still use a waxed chain or use Synergetic?

[@SILCAVelo]

I'd always start on wax, worst case, carry a Synergetic and top off with that for extreme type events, but yes, wax is pretty much always better for longer than most anything else, it just doesn't hide it as well when it breaks down.

[@RodrigoDeJaneiro]

Any comments on the difference in performance on ZFC between SILCA Synergetic and Synerg-E ? Synerg-E appears better on blocks 1-3 then “falls off a cliff” when compared to Synergetic

[@SILCAVelo]

SynergE is much higher viscosity to prevent it from flinging under hard ebike or indoor trainer use. In a test like ZFC where he is applying the lube over the dirty chain to test to see how effective the lube is at washing out dirt. The higher viscosity really hurts it in that part of the test, however, if you degrease the chain and apply, the results in blocks 4-6 would be on par with Synergetic if not possibly improved slightly.

[@BBQSKI]

Silca hot wax is outstanding on my road bike, but on my mountain bike in dusty conditions, I can’t really go more than a couple rides before my chain starts making noise. Is the wax all gone? Application of drip SS certainly solves the problem

[@AllanHundeboll]

For mtb reset and reapply based on hours and the conditions. Not km's ridden.

[@thatguy9051]

The only thing Josh cracked was my wallet. There was "Zero Friction". Winner of a case and caption of the day.....haha.

[@carlosflanders518]

I'm a huge friction and tribology freak (2 patents in the area) and a passionate cyclist. I've tried several times to make my way through Adam's website and videos and failed miserably. I put up the white flag and admit defeat. Honestly, I'd rather give up 20 watts on my FTP than try again. You're doing the Lord's work!

[@SILCAVelo]

Thanks Carlos! Point us toward your patents! Josh is a total patent and research paper geek!

[@rogerheatwole4103]

I use Hot Melt on the chains I use outside and Synergetic on the chain I use indoors. I did not like the flakes of wax coming off indoors, that is why I went with Synergetic

[@SILCAVelo]

You should try SynergE indoors.. the all time single application record holder at ZFC, and also a bit more viscous than Synergetic so it eliminates any flinging even under the hardest efforts. It was designed with Ebikes and Ecycling in mind!

[@rogerheatwole4103]

@@SILCAVelo I will when I need to purchase more chain lube for indoors.

[@robertmcfadyen9156]

The zero friction data sheets are easy to understand but the testing methods they use still leave areas for error such as preparation each time around . Replication is difficult .

[@SILCAVelo]

While contamination leaves room for variance in later blocks, we've done some baselining with them and found that Block 1 is repeatable to better than 1% which makes it better than much of the testing that exists in this industry.

[@uncleants]

Very good stuff and well explained, but the elephant in the room is straight refined paraffin wax with no additives as a hot melt immersion wax. It's the base for the top commercial immersion waxes. It's cheap and readily available. It won't shed flakes of potentially toxic/carcinogenic forever chemicals into the environment or the hallway my bike shares with my wife, children and Woofy the dog. It only did very, very marginally worse than MSW in Friction Facts' tests and came out top in the original test. What it hasn't had is the ZFC marathon test. Maybe it would fail at some point but I'd put money on it not.

[@SILCAVelo]

Not an elephant at all.. there is lots of data out there on the efficiency of paraffin, but also data hidden within the data. Original MSW was pure paraffin with PTFE and MoS2, it was 0.8 watt faster than pure paraffin. Original SILCA SecretBlend is less than 50% paraffin mixed with some other high tech waxes plus WS2 additive and finishes Adam's test with 4X less wear, and tested 1 watt faster than MSW in the Tour Magazin friction test last year. For many people, 1.8watts and 4x wear reduction is not a huge deal, but considering that's as many watts as that $800 ceramicspeed OSPW saves, it's a pretty good value. Also of note, the new MSW is an almost exact copy of the SILCA wax, in terms of additive, but the wax blend is slightly different resulting in increased wear over ZFC test.

[@OUTDOORS55]

@@SILCAVelowhere are you getting power data from that's accurate to 1.8 watts?

[@Vam1500]

I use a tub of super secret liquid wax and let the chain soak in it. Presumably that leads to better penetration?

[@SILCAVelo]

We actually discontinued the tub after learning that it really doesn't improve the penetration. The wax particles in SupeSecret are so small that they really get where they need to go! You definitely need to use an immersion method with many of the other brands, but with ours we found that it really didn't improve performance.

[@dudeonbike800]

"New Shimmer!"

[@MrGatlin98]

So if wax performs better even in wet conditions, what is the point of wet lube (such as Synergetic)?

[@SILCAVelo]

Not everybody wants to do the whole stripping the chain and maintaining the wax protocol.. for those people, we developed Synergetic which you use just like any wet lube, and can apply directly over top of factory grease if you like. Synergetic also makes an excellent field lubricant for very long events like Unbound 300 where you can't apply wax lubricants as they take too long to dry, so you can apply synergetic over top of your wax if it breaks down.

[@MrGatlin98]

Ha, I was watching one of your videos right as you replied! That makes sense, especially where it's impossible to use a wax lube like a race. I guess my confusion is that your still going to need to degrease and clean the chain when using a wet lube, so it doesn't seem like any less maintenance than a wax chain at that point. @@SILCAVelo

[@jeffkoontz2186]

I'm a bit over a month out for Paris Brest Paris - got any thoughts on a lube strategy for 1200km on one continuous ride?

[@SILCAVelo]

I'd start with a hot waxed chain and move to Synergetic from there. You can apply synergetic while riding right onto the chain and it will help flush out any dirt or road grit that's accumulating, especially if it rains. We've had our pros doing this for major events over the last 2 years including Unbound and the Unbound XL with great success.

[@beams2002]

@@SILCAVelo or have 2 extra pre-waxed chains on the ready 🤣😂

[@kennethward9530]

@@beams2002 +1 on putting pre-waxed chains with new quick links in your drop bags-bon chance, have fun!

[@Gieszkanne]

@@SILCAVelo Top wax with oil? Why not with Super Secret Drip?

[@AllanHundeboll]

​@@GieszkanneWax drip on use water as carrier. Water needs many hours to evaporate -especially in cold or humid environment.

[@rafaeldegiacomoaraujo8778]

Josh, I don't understand why you would run the chain with the factory grease for 200km, contaminate the components, then strip the chain, the drivetrain, and do hot waxing. This just seems wasteful and unnecessary. Especially for the SRAM factory grease, which bonds more crap than superbonder...

[@SILCAVelo]

This was just out there as an option for people.. also for our race prepped chains, we run then for 100km to help debur and burnish the metal inside the chain a bit. If you wax it first, this won't happen as the wax is too good of a lube, so a little 'run-in' with the factory grease can be a good thing, but certainly isn't necessary.

[@rafaeldegiacomoaraujo8778]

@@SILCAVelo Thanks!

[@larrystandridge]

At the 333 mile for melt wax how is he reapplying without cleaning the chain?

[@SILCAVelo]

He's applying drip lubes just over the top to test how well the lubricants wash out any dirt, and for hot wax, he's just throwing the chain into the wax. It's notable that the lubricants that claim to 'clean and lube' all perform worse than just pure lubricants even when used in this manner.

[@Eirikkinserdal]

have you looked into the new formula for ufo drip(Wet weather) is it possible to use as a top off on silca hot melt?

[@SILCAVelo]

We have not tested it as the first generation UFO Wet has had some sort of manufacturing issue that makes it not work very well in any condition. Our understanding is that they are reworking the product entirely after numerous media outlets had bad experiences with the test product. Escape Collective covered this in a podcast episode about a month back if you want to learn more.

[@Eirikkinserdal]

I bought it straight away, and it doesnt last long at all.

[@SILCAVelo]

Maybe contact CeramicSpeed, in the Escape podcast both James and Ronan reported very short life expectancy and were told by CeramicSpeed that there was some production issue. CeramicSpeed is a very reputable company with excellent testing, so I fully trust that this would be some production issue and not necessarily a product issue. I also know just how insanely hard it is to make this type of high complexity emulsion/suspension as we do it too!

[@Eirikkinserdal]

On the other hand they have halved the content of all their maintenance products, while prices remain the same. effectively doubling their prices..

[@RAP4EVERMRC96]

Can somebody clear me up. I don't get if all lubes get reapplied after 333km im each block or if they get reapplied to manufacturer recommendations?

[@SILCAVelo]

All lubes are applied at 333km each block.. if the data says 'D.A.' next to the lube name, then it was reapplied every 166km or so.

[@AllanHundeboll]

Except contamination test block where all lubricants get reapplied dobbelt as frequently.

[@evanjohn503]

could you stick a pdf file download next time?

[@makantahi3731]

it's amazing how you managed to make a simple thing as complicated as possible, you take ordinary wax, heat the chain on a bicycle with an induction heater, pass the wax over the chain, wipe the wax off the chain with a cloth, repeat the action every 100 km and that's the end of the story

[@draugmithrin]

Been using Squirt and Juice Lubes similar drip wax. As you say it's slightly sticky makes black marks and produces build-up on cassette and chainrings. Silca's hot melt wax is much cleaner, and with the waxing system easy to use. I use 7 speed chains on my commute bike, reusable links and have a few waxed and swap out as needed.

[@makantahi3731]

8:36 hair dryer, for what?, to heat the chain on the bike, that is not normal, so with the induction heater the chain is heated and hot waxing is done on the bike every time

[@SILCAVelo]

No, just to blow out some of the excess water from the cleaning of the chain.. putting a chain with too much water on it into hot wax can lead to flash boiling and wax splatter

[@makantahi3731]

@@SILCAVelo you can not blow out anything from chain with hair dryer, with compressed air you can

[@AllanHundeboll]

Some drip on wax like squirt need a warm chain to fully penetrate into the chain

[@makantahi3731]

@@AllanHundeboll after driving in the rain, I first heat the chain with an induction heater until the water evaporates from the chain, a crackling sound is heard, this should be done carefully so that the chain does not overheat and the water has time to evaporate from the chain, after that I touch the chain with a piece of wax that immediately enters the the chain, after that I wipe it with a cloth in which the wax remains with impurities from the chain, if there are a lot of impurities it can be repeated until you can see on the cloth that clean wax is coming out of the chain

[@makantahi3731]

22:54 ha ha $600 for a cassette, someone has gone crazy, only now the owners should do the reshaping of the worn teeth on the cassette, they would save a fortune

[@jamesmoros1274]

The only benefit I found using Wax is that it comes off easier than lube. The problem I found with Wax is it’s High maintenance and no protection in wet weather, it just comes off and the chain will rust. Cheers from Oz🇦🇺

[@GC987]

If you want to be the best, one needs to drill down into the detail. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

[@aarons1073]

12 minutes turned into 33. hehe

[@ridefast0]

Good content but I don't like your title; in many places outside the USA the word INSANE would be taken literally as a negative, discrediting term meaning 'imagined' or 'unreasonable'!

[@erichouck9487]

great information, What would you recommend for cleaning a hot waxed chain before retreating with hot wax?

[@SILCAVelo]

Boiling water is cheapest and most environmentally friendly. If it isn't too dirty, you can just wipe with microfiber to remove surface contamination and then straight into the wax.