New chain should I oil it?
Comments
-
balthazar wrote:
Hey Dennis I'd keep away from used engine oil. Though it does no harm to a bike chain, you don't want that stuff on your hands more than necessary – it's full of all sorts of unpleasantries. The dribble of clean oil left in the can after you "emptied" it into the car will do for the bike. Chainsaw oil or motorbike oil is undoubtedly preferred if you have it. I don't and I'm not going to buy it especially – but my car gets through oil, so thats what I use for the bikes.dennisn wrote:Also are all these lubes that you pay big money for(consider the price per gallon) any better than the chainsaw oil or used motor oil that many people use?
I just remembered someone saying that in another post on another topic. Chain lube probably. I seem to recall seeing one or two of them on this forum. :? :?0 -
I get the feeling that with your yellow guys you mean me. I hope I've never given the impression that I think handling used engine oil is a good idea. The last exchange we all had on this subject was this one:dennisn wrote:balthazar wrote:
Hey Dennis I'd keep away from used engine oil. Though it does no harm to a bike chain, you don't want that stuff on your hands more than necessary – it's full of all sorts of unpleasantries. The dribble of clean oil left in the can after you "emptied" it into the car will do for the bike. Chainsaw oil or motorbike oil is undoubtedly preferred if you have it. I don't and I'm not going to buy it especially – but my car gets through oil, so thats what I use for the bikes.dennisn wrote:Also are all these lubes that you pay big money for(consider the price per gallon) any better than the chainsaw oil or used motor oil that many people use?
I just remembered someone saying that in another post on another topic. Chain lube probably. I seem to recall seeing one or two of them on this forum. :? :?
http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtop ... =#15882807
which might be worthwhile reading for the folk here, as this is just rehashing that ground. Still, I think it's important enough to restate: don't handle used engine oil unnecessarily: it isn't at all nice.0 -
balthazar wrote:SheffSimon wrote:balthazar wrote:Spray some WD40 or similar solvent on a rag, and run the chain through the rag to remove most of the sticky grease from the outside. Don't use so much that you dilute the grease inside, which is a perfect lubricant. You shouldn't need to oil the chain for a while after that.
No, no, no.
If you really want to drag this into yet another tedious argument then at least expound on your objections: "no, no, no" helps nobody.
Otherwise, and very much preferably, review the recent long-winded threads by using the search facility. I've written at length on this subject recently, as have others.
Mmm...must have a look at those lengthy discussions on oiling me chain.
0 -
Well, the time before last when I got a new SRAM chain, I didn't put any additional lubricant on, and after about 30 miles it was squeaking. I just put a new one on yesterday so I gave it a light drizzle of Finish Line Dry this time. I'll let you know tomorrow.
I'm not convinced that the factory lube is somehow better than anything us mortals can buy. That's just stupid.
Re: WD40, I keep it well away from my bikes these days, but I did run it as a chain lube for a while and it just about works if you re-apply it after every ride. But not recommended.0 -
-
I spray some teflon based lube thats £3 a can at my chain and rear chain set once a week... Cant say that Id reccomend it as I really dont know any better.
Im more curious about the "removing and cleaning" of a chain as I heard that breaking a link and clicking it back into place pretty much consigned your chain to the bin anyway. Or is there equally as much horse crap in that little pearl of wisdom as most of the chain myths?
0 -
redddraggon wrote:I always thought the stuff that came with the chain was packing grease, but I normally just ride the chain like that until it needs cleaning
that's pretty much all it is - it has mostly f-all to do with lubrication, and much more to do with stopping the chain from rusting while it sits in a box, on a shelf, or in a container in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.
I remember fitting Sedis chains many years ago - and none of them would shift properly unless you removed the sticky grease coating first...0 -
I think you are a bit out of date with that0
-
well if you buy Sram chain it is a lube. and TBH i would be very surprised if the others were not also."Do not follow where the path may lead, Go instead where there is no path, and Leave a Trail."
Parktools :?:SheldonBrown0 -
same as anything else, if you take care of it it will last longer, a good wipe and a relube when it starts to look dry, I use Teflon lube, not to sticky and doesn't fling off if you don't over do it, seems to work on the Q-NTJust hold it there,don\'t move and don\'t drop it, I\'ll be back in a while.(If it\'s safe).0
-
-
my own anecdotal evidence suggests that the 'shipping lube' is not ideal - it's usually too heavy and too sticky - and heavy and sticky are not ideal qualities for a cycle chain lube.
In general, manufacturer's care instructions (and I've never bought a chain that comes with any such instructions) are usually not worth the paper they're written on...0 -
I don't know why, SRAM, and KMC offer advice, KMC even has a "chain school" - why would they bother with instructions they don't believe in? They do all the product research and development, and must have the most information on chain wear and failure, I don't think I would reject this knowledge so readily, in favour of this body of cycling mythology that gets aired and regurgitated here every month or sosoftlad wrote:my own anecdotal evidence suggests that the 'shipping lube' is not ideal - it's usually too heavy and too sticky - and heavy and sticky are not ideal qualities for a cycle chain lube.
In general, manufacturer's care instructions (and I've never bought a chain that comes with any such instructions) are usually not worth the paper they're written on... 0 -
Also, why don't shops remove this when they prepare bikes for sale?0
-
alfablue wrote:I don't know why, SRAM, and KMC offer advice, KMC even has a "chain school" - why would they bother with instructions they don't believe in? They do all the product research and development, and must have the most information on chain wear and failure, I don't think I would reject this knowledge so readily, in favour of this body of cycling mythology that gets aired and regurgitated here every month or so
I can't help you with any of that, fella. All I can tell you is that I have been running chains my way for well over 20 years and I have never had a chain-related failure on any bike. My transmissions run smooth, clean and quiet and my chain life seems particularly good.
By all means call it 'mythology' if you don't understand it, but if all we ever did on here was tell people to follow manufacturer's instructions, it would be much of a discussion forum, would it..?0 -
I am not calling it mythology because I don't understand it, I am calling it mythology because there is no evidence apart from anecdote. My chains run fantastically too - proof? No.
Following manufacturer's instructions is not necessary the folly that you make out - sometimes, just sometimes, they may have a teeny bit of credibility.0 -
Everyone's wrong. When I get a new chain, I p*ss all over it. The urea eliminates any grease, residue, muck, factory rubbish (what would they know anyway?)
Then, still dripping, I fix it carefully to the chainset.
For lube I hawk up a nice big grolly and slime it all over the chain. Mornings are evidently the best time to do this. Or wait until you or someone else around you has a cold for the quality stuff. DO mix and match, it adds to the lubricating 'range'.
This method lasts for at least 15 miles before you have to repeat. And what's more, it's free and environmentally friendly.
Good luck mate!
0 -
Hilarious0
-
alfablue wrote:Following manufacturer's instructions is not necessary the folly that you make out - sometimes, just sometimes, they may have a teeny bit of credibility.
some of them may indeed be credible - but there is usually more than one way of doing something.
For instance, all the Yamaha instruction manuals that I've seen state that owners should use 'Yamalube' oils throughout the engine & gearbox - and yet I don't know of any Yamaha owner that has ever done that - certainly none of the bikes I have serviced have ever had problems running on Rock, or Silkolene, or any other regular brand. So forgive me if I treat manufacturer instructions with a little disdain.....0 -
Of course I forgive you - Yamaha obviously have a vested interest in getting you to use their own product. I don't think the same applies in this instance, however. Healthy scepticism is a good thing, choosing your own methods, fine. As for the out of date comment, yes, chains used to be shipped with a product entirely designed to prevent rust during shipping, things have moved on and it is a suitable lube, and one that Sheldon Brown and others recommend that you don't remove. It will be replaced with your own lube soon enough, but it poses no performance issues, and the process of cleaning the chain if done too aggressively, may cause more problems than it solves. I speak as an ex-chain stripper, so maybe I am the worst type! But I have seen the light.0
-
alfablue wrote:Of course I forgive you - Yamaha obviously have a vested interest in getting you to use their own product. I don't think the same applies in this instance, however. Healthy scepticism is a good thing, choosing your own methods, fine. As for the out of date comment, yes, chains used to be shipped with a product entirely designed to prevent rust during shipping, things have moved on and it is a suitable lube, and one that Sheldon Brown and others recommend that you don't remove. It will be replaced with your own lube soon enough, but it poses no performance issues, and the process of cleaning the chain if done too aggressively, may cause more problems than it solves. I speak as an ex-chain stripper, so maybe I am the worst type! But I have seen the light.
dear old sheldon - his is just another opinion, but one that many people fall back on in the event of a disagreement, because he is so easily linked to.
Perhaps if I started my own website, people on forums would eventually begin to link to that too - and eventually, my own views would become accepted as the 'industry norm' - because in terms of establishing personal opinions on what works or doesn't work, I am certainly no more or less qualified than he is....0 -
Softlad - we will undoubtedly be citing you for decades to come!0
-
I was of the impression that WD40 was a solvent and a lubricant. It removes whatever's
on there and adds it's own lubricant. The problem is that the lubricant is too thick for
chains, so you end up with no lubrication and your chain will stretch/fail quicker?
I use White Lightning. It seems a bit cleaner than ones like Finish Line and one £8 bottle will
last me a year.
0 -
TheStone wrote:I was of the impression that WD40 was a solvent and a lubricant. It removes whatever's
on there and adds it's own lubricant. The problem is that the lubricant is too thick for
chains, so you end up with no lubrication and your chain will stretch/fail quicker?
I use White Lightning. It seems a bit cleaner than ones like Finish Line and one £8 bottle will
last me a year.
Most of the tramps in Manchester use White Lightning too. Very different result to oiling a chain though...0 -
TheStone wrote:I was of the impression that WD40 was a solvent and a lubricant. It removes whatever's on there and adds it's own lubricant. The problem is that the lubricant is too thick for chains, so you end up with no lubrication and your chain will stretch/fail quicker?
no idea where you got that from.
almost any aerosol lubricant will contain a solvent, by necessity. There is nothing wrong with a solvent removing whatever is on the chain - providing it replaces it with something which is also cabable of lubrication. If anything, WD is possibly too thin, not too thick.0 -
no no no.softlad wrote:my own anecdotal evidence suggests that the 'shipping lube' is not ideal - it's usually too heavy and too sticky - and heavy and sticky are not ideal qualities for a cycle chain lube.
In general, manufacturer's care instructions (and I've never bought a chain that comes with any such instructions) are usually not worth the paper they're written on...
the stickier and thicker the better.heres why. teflon is no good either. the engineering principle that 'lubrication' works on is keeping metal surfaces that are being ground together apart with a hydraulic type action. this happens when two surfaces are close together and VISCOSITY takes over. the thinner the lubricant the less load it can carry before it squashes out and metal contacts. if its sticky it stays on longer. it will be sucked back into the chain in the same way its squashed out.
if chains were tight tolerance like in an engine then yes thick stuff would be no good simple because its too thick to get easily into the gaps, but chains are nothing like that tollerance since they wear and have loose fitting rollers and have to flex enough to change across the block, they also dont operate at anything like high speed and dont have much contact area so need thick oil or grease to support the load with bigger gaps and small contact area .
get a plastic bottle put a small hole in the top and fill i with oils of differing thickness.then try and squeeze the oil out. your squeezing represents the load on a bearing and the size of the hole is the tollerance. see the difference.
yes_ chainsaw oil , mtorcycle chain oil , thick oil,engine oil ok with regular application
no_ anything thin or teflon based, wd40,gt85 ,water , expensive.0 -
Great thread this.......0
-
rake wrote:
no no no.softlad wrote:my own anecdotal evidence suggests that the 'shipping lube' is not ideal - it's usually too heavy and too sticky - and heavy and sticky are not ideal qualities for a cycle chain lube.
In general, manufacturer's care instructions (and I've never bought a chain that comes with any such instructions) are usually not worth the paper they're written on...
the stickier and thicker the better.heres why. teflon is no good either. the engineering principle that 'lubrication' works on is keeping metal surfaces that are being ground together apart with a hydraulic type action. this happens when two surfaces are close together and VISCOSITY takes over. the thinner the lubricant the less load it can carry before it squashes out and metal contacts. if its sticky it stays on longer. it will be sucked back into the chain in the same way its squashed out.
if chains were tight tolerance like in an engine then yes thick stuff would be no good simple because its too thick to get easily into the gaps, but chains are nothing like that tollerance since they wear and have loose fitting rollers and have to flex enough to change across the block, they also dont operate at anything like high speed and dont have much contact area so need thick oil or grease to support the load with bigger gaps and small contact area .
get a plastic bottle put a small hole in the top and fill i with oils of differing thickness.then try and squeeze the oil out. your squeezing represents the load on a bearing and the size of the hole is the tollerance. see the difference.
yes_ chainsaw oil , mtorcycle chain oil , thick oil,engine oil ok with regular application
no_ anything thin or teflon based, wd40,gt85 ,water , expensive.
Well put.0
