Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 239
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    144

    New question here. Chain-L oil !!!!

    does any body ever used this chain lubricant ... no 5 chain-l ...


  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    522
    What does it smell like?
    Half our life is spent trying to find something to do with the time we have rushed through life trying to save

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    144
    don t know ... i would like too see if some one already use it before i buy it !!!!

  4. #4
    Old man on a bike
    Reputation: Bikinfoolferlife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,386
    At first I thought it was a joke product, but after reading the stuff on their website it sounds very interesting. I'm just about to re stock my lube, just might try this stuff...and the one California shop is relatively close! How much is the typical retail cost?
    "...the people get the government they deserve..."
    suum quique

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    144
    i'm from canada and it cost me 12$ including shipping ... so it is interesting ... !!!!

  6. #6
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikinfoolferlife
    At first I thought it was a joke product, but after reading the stuff on their website it sounds very interesting. I'm just about to re stock my lube, just might try this stuff...and the one California shop is relatively close! How much is the typical retail cost?
    They have an interesting sales pitch but chains do not have bearings. It could also be argued that the load bearing (different meaning) surfaces of a chain are much larger than those of the BB bearings, not the other way around.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  7. #7
    Old man on a bike
    Reputation: Bikinfoolferlife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,386
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    They have an interesting sales pitch but chains do not have bearings. It could also be argued that the load bearing (different meaning) surfaces of a chain are much larger than those of the BB bearings, not the other way around.
    So they don't have any magic formula for a lubricant that works better on the load bearing surfaces in a roller chain? Edjucamate us, Don.
    "...the people get the government they deserve..."
    suum quique

  8. #8
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikinfoolferlife
    So they don't have any magic formula for a lubricant that works better on the load bearing surfaces in a roller chain? Edjucamate us, Don.
    I do not know if they do or not. Just that if they think a roller chain has "bearings" what else does that say about their claims and research processes.

    Chain-L does mention extreme pressure (EP) lubes but do not explain why it helps.

    I have seen other lube companies talk about EP chain oil performance as related to high pressure spot loads and lube shear resistance. The key being the lube does not get completely squeezed from between the surfaces to reduce wear from metal to metal contact. Chain-L claims their lube flows back in again after it has been pushed out, not that it stays where - and when - it does the most good.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  9. #9
    Vaginatarian
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,686
    I have to agree with Shiggy, sounds like a bunch of crap. Theres a study out that measured the friction & drag of a bicycling chain ( in a lab) with various types of lube and with no lube, guess what ? no difference, no extra friction, no extra heat, no drag, the conclusion reached was the main benefit of lubes was to fill the voids inside the chain so that water & dirt didn't get in . A major cause of chain wear isn't metal on metal its dirt, and dirt mixed with oil makes a fine abrasive. Read their instructions, they recommend soaking you chain for 10 mins. then lightly wipe off but leave a film, of their own words" sticky oil that will attract dirt", they go on to state that the dirt will eventually soak up the excess oil and flake off, and that even though their oil is solvent based its better for the environment than other oils and will get eaten up by enzymes in the soil and since you don't have to apply it as often. So, if you don't apply it as often I guess that means you don't clean your chain as often? so what happens to the dirt that mixes with the sticky oil and gets into the chain? grind, grind, grind

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,498
    It's always interesting when folks who've never seen a product feel free to pan it.

    Truth in advertizing - I'm the maker of chain-L- so feel free to take my comments with a grain of salt, but I'd like to correct some factual errors, and in the interest of fairness in future posts make an offer to the folks who read this.

    First two corrections -
    1-to the comment that chains don't have bearings, I suggest searching "plain bearing" in wikipedia or any other reference, then looking at the flexible the pin and link structure of a chain.
    2- I'd be interested in seeing the study of chain friction, but need to clarify that we don't lubricate chains to reduce power loss, which is negligible in any case, but rather to prevent chain wear. (As to the conclusions, they might vary depending on the load during the test, and the viscosity of the lubricant. At low loads the power loss to to viscous drag of a heavy oil might exceed the frictional drag. But at higher loads the friction is proportionately higher while the viscous drag remains constant, so at higher loads the effects of lubrication would become more significant.)

    I'm not interested in starting a flame war and don't expect to sell Chain-L through hype, nor do I wish to convert folks who've already decide what they like, but I do wish to point out that chain-L gets generally good reviews from folks who've actually used it.

    The offer, believing that the proof of the pudding is in the eating, I'm offering to mail a free sample of chain-L #5 to the first 50 open minded readers, with the only condition being that they promise to try it and email me their honest opinions about it.

    visit the chain-L.com site and leave me an email if interested. francis

  11. #11
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,307
    Quote Originally Posted by FBinNY
    It's always interesting when folks who've never seen a product feel free to pan it.

    Truth in advertizing - I'm the maker of chain-L- so feel free to take my comments with a grain of salt, but I'd like to correct some factual errors, and in the interest of fairness in future posts make an offer to the folks who read this.

    First two corrections -
    1-to the comment that chains don't have bearings, I suggest searching "plain bearing" in wikipedia or any other reference, then looking at the flexible the pin and link structure of a chain.
    2- I'd be interested in seeing the study of chain friction, but need to clarify that we don't lubricate chains to reduce power loss, which is negligible in any case, but rather to prevent chain wear. (As to the conclusions, they might vary depending on the load during the test, and the viscosity of the lubricant. At low loads the power loss to to viscous drag of a heavy oil might exceed the frictional drag. But at higher loads the friction is proportionately higher while the viscous drag remains constant, so at higher loads the effects of lubrication would become more significant.)

    I'm not interested in starting a flame war and don't expect to sell Chain-L through hype, nor do I wish to convert folks who've already decide what they like, but I do wish to point out that chain-L gets generally good reviews from folks who've actually used it.

    The offer, believing that the proof of the pudding is in the eating, I'm offering to mail a free sample of chain-L #5 to the first 50 open minded readers, with the only condition being that they promise to try it and email me their honest opinions about it.

    visit the chain-L.com site and leave me an email if interested. francis
    First, thanks for posting and i wish you well.

    Second, the reference to chains having bearings was in comparing them to BB bearings. It is an apples to oranges comparison. Plain bearings (AKA bushings) are very different and have different pros and cons vs the ball bearings in BBs. The lubrication needs are also not directly comparable.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by FBinNY
    It's always interesting when folks who've never seen a product feel free to pan it.

    Truth in advertizing - I'm the maker of chain-L- so feel free to take my comments with a grain of salt, but I'd like to correct some factual errors, and in the interest of fairness in future posts make an offer to the folks who read this.

    First two corrections -
    1-to the comment that chains don't have bearings, I suggest searching "plain bearing" in wikipedia or any other reference, then looking at the flexible the pin and link structure of a chain.
    2- I'd be interested in seeing the study of chain friction, but need to clarify that we don't lubricate chains to reduce power loss, which is negligible in any case, but rather to prevent chain wear. (As to the conclusions, they might vary depending on the load during the test, and the viscosity of the lubricant. At low loads the power loss to to viscous drag of a heavy oil might exceed the frictional drag. But at higher loads the friction is proportionately higher while the viscous drag remains constant, so at higher loads the effects of lubrication would become more significant.)

    I'm not interested in starting a flame war and don't expect to sell Chain-L through hype, nor do I wish to convert folks who've already decide what they like, but I do wish to point out that chain-L gets generally good reviews from folks who've actually used it.

    The offer, believing that the proof of the pudding is in the eating, I'm offering to mail a free sample of chain-L #5 to the first 50 open minded readers, with the only condition being that they promise to try it and email me their honest opinions about it.

    visit the chain-L.com site and leave me an email if interested. francis
    Just want to say that i just received my bottle of chain-l this week and it seam to be good ... a bit heavy so it will stay in the chain ... i try my bike yesterday on 60 miles run and everything work fine ... give the sample bottle to my father (they run 75 miles everyday) so he gonna tell me more in couple of weeks ...

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    189

    Amused by the name

    I give them credit for marketing. I would have never come up with connecting a globally known parfume to lube, but it's amusing. Maybe it has a nice fragrance to it. Worth trying since they have a sense of humor. I've bought so many different lubes, one more won't break the bank. In the end I'll probably go back to my home brew lube.


  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    124
    This seems like the perfect lubricant for my commuting in the cold Syracuse (lots of wet salty snowy icy roads) winter. I usually use a wax lubricant like Squirt but it reacts badly to salt. Ill pick up a bottle and report how it fairs in a few months.

  15. #15
    Old man on a bike
    Reputation: Bikinfoolferlife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,386
    Got my free sample from Francis in today's mail...will take a while for a test report, though.
    "...the people get the government they deserve..."
    suum quique

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    55
    I've been using Militec-1 oil for quite some time with very good results. http://www.militec1.com/index.html

    Here's an interesting article: http://www.militec1.com/lumberjack.html

    I don't know if they are still doing it, but last time I heard, you can email them and ask for a sample. I got my sample about a year ago which included militec-1 grease and militec-1 oil.

  17. #17
    Vaginatarian
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,686

  18. #18
    Never trust a fart
    Reputation: frdfandc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    4,049
    I sent and email to him. Gonna try out the chain lube myself.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    124
    http://www.jhu.edu/news_info/news/ho...ug99/bike.html That study is simply power loss through the chain system not a study on how long the chain will last.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,498
    Absolutely right. The amount of power loss in chain drives is very low under any circumstance.

    This study is almost 10 years old and may also suffer from flawed methodology, though without seeing the entire report it's impossible to tell.

    One thing that bothers me is their conclusion that chainwheel size is significant. The press report presents this as if it were a surprise, and if so I'm extremely disappointed. Chain drives are 100years old and highly researched. Any manual on their design or use would clearly state that larger sprockets are desirable for greater efficiency. If these folks weren't aware of this going in, it indicates sloppy preparation for their study and might imply other errors as well.

    Regardless of this study, real world experience with bicycles demonstrates tremendous variation in chain life, with lubrication definitely being a factor, along with terain, speed, chain width and gear selection among others.

    I managed a customer service center for one of the major component makers for a number of years and can tell you that when 10s came out chain life complaints went through the roof. and two predictors of short life were lubrication (both type and follow through or maintainance) and terrain. Rarely did folks in the plains states have issues, with highest number of complaints coming from those riding in the rolling terain of the northeast.

    BTW- there are still openings in my offer of free test samples of Chain-L #5, if anyone's interested.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    144
    So let's go folk a free sample ... try it and you will see how thus oil is effective
    Quote Originally Posted by FBinNY
    Absolutely right. The amount of power loss in chain drives is very low under any circumstance.

    This study is almost 10 years old and may also suffer from flawed methodology, though without seeing the entire report it's impossible to tell.

    One thing that bothers me is their conclusion that chainwheel size is significant. The press report presents this as if it were a surprise, and if so I'm extremely disappointed. Chain drives are 100years old and highly researched. Any manual on their design or use would clearly state that larger sprockets are desirable for greater efficiency. If these folks weren't aware of this going in, it indicates sloppy preparation for their study and might imply other errors as well.

    Regardless of this study, real world experience with bicycles demonstrates tremendous variation in chain life, with lubrication definitely being a factor, along with terain, speed, chain width and gear selection among others.

    I managed a customer service center for one of the major component makers for a number of years and can tell you that when 10s came out chain life complaints went through the roof. and two predictors of short life were lubrication (both type and follow through or maintainance) and terrain. Rarely did folks in the plains states have issues, with highest number of complaints coming from those riding in the rolling terain of the northeast.

    BTW- there are still openings in my offer of free test samples of Chain-L #5, if anyone's interested.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Wombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,016
    Yes, I asked for a sample, although not sure if they're willing to ship it to Australia.

    Tim

  23. #23
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,307
    Quote Originally Posted by FBinNY
    Absolutely right. The amount of power loss in chain drives is very low under any circumstance.

    This study is almost 10 years old and may also suffer from flawed methodology, though without seeing the entire report it's impossible to tell.

    One thing that bothers me is their conclusion that chainwheel size is significant. The press report presents this as if it were a surprise, and if so I'm extremely disappointed. Chain drives are 100years old and highly researched. Any manual on their design or use would clearly state that larger sprockets are desirable for greater efficiency. If these folks weren't aware of this going in, it indicates sloppy preparation for their study and might imply other errors as well.
    ...
    Egg Zackly. I am reading a book on the history of the derailleur (and gearing in general). There were studies made in the 1880s that show roller chain power loss was in the 0.5% range. 1990s and early 2000s tests confirmed this. The gear size is less widely reported but many riders (including me) have noticed the difference in use.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  24. #24
    Maromero
    Reputation: doccoraje's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,492
    Quote Originally Posted by Wombat
    Yes, I asked for a sample, although not sure if they're willing to ship it to Australia.

    Tim
    I also did, but I don't think they'll send it even to Mex, I didn't have any response.... yet.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Wombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,016
    Francis indicated he would send a sample to Australia.

    Tim

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GhisalloWheels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    518
    Received my sample today. I cleaned my chain and applied as directed. Its thicker than the other lubes I've been using. My first ride is Weds. night. We'll see.
    Cycle tracks will abound in Utopia. ~H.G. Wells

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirthead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    566
    Received my sample a couple of days ago. It is very thick compared to the other lube I typically use......ProLink. I'm in Phoenix and the trails are VERY dusty. It's going to be interesting seeing how much dust Chain-L picks up. I have to relube with ProLink every 1-2 hrs of ride time, but it picks up the least amount of dust of anything I've tried so far. Planning to relube with Chain-L today and hit the trail. I'll post as to how it works compared to ProLink.

  28. #28
    Maromero
    Reputation: doccoraje's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,492
    I just got a PM from Francis, he'll send it down to Mex

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirthead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    566

    First Ride Update......

    Ok, got in a ride yesterday in dusty Phoenix using Chain-L, and here are my observations. My ride was cut a little short because of a blown sidewall....... And by the way, if you ride rocky trails and are thinking of trying Specialized "The Captain" tires...either the Sworks or Control versions.....DON'T!!! I've gone through 3 in the last dozen rides. All have failed sidewalls. If that tire isn't going to hold up to a few rocks they shouldn't be selling it in this area. Ok, I feel better now....back on topic.

    I cleaned my chain, let dry, and applied Chain-L. It's very thick and "stringy". When I turned the cranks there were "strings" of the lube between the chain and the chainring teeth. It kinda got all over the front derailleur and pulleys on the rear derailleur during this process. It was easy to clean off so no big problem. After rotating the cranks a few times, I wiped the chain as dry as possible and went riding.

    Using ProLink, I can see a solid coat of dust on my chain after about 10 mins of riding. After an hour or so, I can hear the grind of the chain in certain gears. I only got in about 40 mins worth of riding because of my tire issue, but the chain seemed to be a little cleaner, and certainly no more dusty than using ProLink. When I returned home, I wiped the chain again and all the dust came right off. Once I replace my tire.....again..... .....I'll ride without reapplying lube.

    ProLink and Rock n Roll are the only lubes I've been able to use here with any sort of success, so it's going to be interesting to see how Chain-L holds up over time. The first ride, albeit a little short, was promising.

    I'll update after the next ride.....and tire.....

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by dirthead
    I cleaned my chain, let dry, and applied Chain-L. It's very thick and "stringy". When I turned the cranks there were "strings" of the lube between the chain and the chainring teeth. It kinda got all over the front derailleur and pulleys on the rear derailleur during this process. It was easy to clean off so no big problem. After rotating the cranks a few times, I wiped the chain as dry as possible and went riding.




    1-New chains should be oiled off the bike by stretching out on newspaper with the rollers up. Oil generously and allow 10 or more minutes to soak in, then wipe chain almost dry leaving a thin film as rust protection. This will do a better job of lubricating and save time on cleanup of the cassette and chainrings. Install and skip to Step 4.

    2-Used chains should first be cleaned as well as possible to avoid wicking dirt in. If the chain has a reusable master link, consider cleaning and oiling it off the bike. see no-1

    3-On the bike, oil chain in high gear (outer ring and smallest cog) or using a chainkeeper. Chain-L soaks in very slowly, so give it 10 minutes or so. While turning the cranks, wipe excess oil off the chain and derailleur pulleys, leaving only the thinnest film possible. Any excess will only make it messier than it needs to be.

    4-Turn the cranks and look carefully for fans of excess oil spinning off the pulleys. There shouldn’t be any. If there are, rewipe the chain and pulleys and repeat until no oil spins off.

    5-Change gears and wipe off the outer chainring. Then run the bike through the gears to spread a bit of the oil throughout the cassette.

    6-Don’t forget to wipe off any oil that got onto the derailleur, chainstay, etc.


    http://chain-l.com/Instructions.html

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirthead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    566
    stduoo7,

    I followed the directions for application. Only problem is I don't have a masterlink, so you have to rotate the cranks slightly to get lube on all the links. When you do this, it strings out. And after letting it soak in for 10 mins, when you begin rotating to wipe the chain, it's a bit messy. That's all I'm saying. I'm not sure how one can rotate the cranks to wipe the chain, without creating a bit of a mess.

  32. #32
    Vaginatarian
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,686
    [QUOTE=dirthead]Ok, got in a ride yesterday in dusty Phoenix using Chain-L, and here are my observations. My ride was cut a little short because of a blown sidewall....... And by the way, if you ride rocky trails and are thinking of trying Specialized "The Captain" tires...either the Sworks or Control versions.....DON'T!!! I've gone through 3 in the last dozen rides. All have failed sidewalls. If that tire isn't going to hold up to a few rocks they shouldn't be selling it in this area. Ok, I feel better now....back on topic.

    are you using the armadillo versions of those tires?

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirthead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    566
    [QUOTE=dan0]
    Quote Originally Posted by dirthead
    are you using the armadillo versions of those tires?
    No, my local shop did not carry the Armadillo version, only Sworks and Control. That will be my next option though, since I like the tire, other than the durability. If I can find that version I'll try it, otherwise it's on to another tire all together.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirthead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    566

    Update #2

    I was able to get another ride in yesterday with good results! I wiped the chain with a solvent rag after my last ride, to get the dust off, but did not apply any more lube. Hit the trail yesterday afternoon and it was extremely dusty, as usual. The drivetrain was very quiet the entire ride, and there was very little dust pickup on the chain when it was over. With Prolink, I would have had quite a bit of dust buildup, but there was almost none with Chain-L. To be honest, I was very surprised. Seeing how thick and "sticky" it seemed during appication, I honestly thought it would turn my chain into a dust magnet. I've tried lots of lubes and the Chain-L picked up less dust than any I've used so far. I'll continue to wipe and ride without relubing until I can hear the chain.

    So far so good in!

  35. #35
    Maromero
    Reputation: doccoraje's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,492
    Sounds good, since we have down here similar conditions.
    I can't wait to try my free sample

  36. #36
    Takw/agranofsalt
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,534
    Quote Originally Posted by dirthead
    I was able to get another ride in yesterday with good results! I wiped the chain with a solvent rag after my last ride, to get the dust off, but did not apply any more lube. Hit the trail yesterday afternoon and it was extremely dusty, as usual. The drivetrain was very quiet the entire ride, and there was very little dust pickup on the chain when it was over. With Prolink, I would have had quite a bit of dust buildup, but there was almost none with Chain-L. To be honest, I was very surprised. Seeing how thick and "sticky" it seemed during appication, I honestly thought it would turn my chain into a dust magnet. I've tried lots of lubes and the Chain-L picked up less dust than any I've used so far. I'll continue to wipe and ride without relubing until I can hear the chain.

    So far so good in!
    That's interesting, I'm a big fan of ProLink too. I use it on my bikes and my dirtbike but I wonder if Chain-L is worth converting to? Now if I could only find a local distributor her in Cali....

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,786
    Quote Originally Posted by dirthead
    I wiped the chain with a solvent rag after my last ride, to get the dust off, but did not apply any more lube.
    Did you also wipe the chain with solvent after every ride when you used Prolink?

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirthead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    566
    Quote Originally Posted by gmcttr
    Did you also wipe the chain with solvent after every ride when you used Prolink?
    Always wiped it after each ride, but not always with solvent. It didn't seem to make a difference if I used solvent for wiping. The chain always picked up about the same amount of dust. Basically, after an hour riding, you could not see metal on the chain. It had a solid coat of dust. Prolink was the "cleanest" lube I had found. Most others would leave a black sludge on the chain after about 10 minutes of riding, regardless of how well the chain was wiped before the ride. With Chain-L, there was a slight amount of dust but the chain was mostly clean. I was very surprised to see that.

  39. #39
    Dirt Deviant
    Reputation: savagemann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,693
    Got my sample a couple days ago. Got the next 2 days off so I am going to give it a try for sure. I am also a regular Pro Link user.
    I plan on fully degreasing my chain before I apply the Chain L. I will also apply per instructions with the chain off the bike. Go Powerlink!!!!
    Look, whatever happens, don't fight the mountain.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirthead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    566

    Good job! Update #3

    Went for ride #3 on Chain-L Friday afternoon. Just as a reminder, I was only getting 1-1.5 hrs ride time on ProLink because of the severe dust on Phoenix trails. On the first application of Chain-L, I got about 2.5 hrs of ride time before the drivetrain started to sound a little "dry". After 3+ hrs of ride time spread over 3 rides, the chain was in need of relubing, but it was amazingly clean.

    So in comparison to ProLink, which has been my lube of choice for 5+ years, I got almost twice the ride time and my chain stayed much cleaner. I never would have predicted that result based on how thick and sticky Chain-L is during application, but those are the results I got.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GhisalloWheels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    518

    Impressions

    I have ridden with the chain-l for four rides now. Total distance of about 40 miles. Trails have been everything from decomposted granite to the finest clay with a few creek crossings mixed in.

    The lube is holding up fine. It looks clean, and hasn't started to talked to me yet. Lasts longer than the Prolink. We will see how it goes when I go to reapply.

    So far I'm impressed.
    Cycle tracks will abound in Utopia. ~H.G. Wells

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cjump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    35
    got my sample today and a full review will come shortly.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Wombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,016
    I received my 2 sets of samples yesterday. Thanks for sending them to Australia Francis. I'll clean the chain and put some on tonight and see how it goes after a while. I'll give the other sample set to a firiend to also try.

    I'll write a report after a few weeks.

    Tim

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cjump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    35
    Just got done with my first ride with Chain-L. I applied it on my fixed gear this morning and, as most other have been, I was surprised to see how thick it was. To me, it smells and feels like motor oil with a sulfur additive although I think there is more to it than that. I would be interested to know what is really in Chain-L. The fixed gear has a KMC single speed chain that is a semi-new chain with the factory lube. I don't think I have over 15 miles on the chain. I wiped it off with a rag soaked in a degreaser. I took care to apply a little bit at a time to avoid the mess but it was easy to get an even coverage. Once it sat for a few minutes, I stretched and off I went with about a 5 mile ride into town. First thing I noticed was that it was quite (not that fixed gears are loud to begin with). I will say that it's thickness is a factor in it being quite. No dust,mud, or grime on the chain after the ride. It also does not look like it broke down or shot off during the ride. No experience yet offroad but so far so good.

  45. #45
    Just a flesh wound
    Reputation: Prophet Julio's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,004

    Chainsaw

    That's what it sounds like. Chain oil for a chainsaw, very thick and it leaves filaments when in the air when you pedal.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,498
    Thanks for the positive reports so far. Chain-L shouldn't leave any trailing filaments when pedaling. If it does, there's too much on the the outside of the chain, and you should wipe off the excess. Remember chains only need lubrication on the inside.

    I enjoy reading all the guesses as to what it is. I could give you the formula, but I'd have to charge a hefty price to compensate for the year I put into the testing & tweaking that led to the current blend. Yes, it's a blend of chemicals in an oil base, each of which serves a particular purpose. No, it isn't motor oil, chainsaw oil, or any other pre-existing product simply put into small bottle. Think about tomato sauce - they're all red, have onion, garlic and various spices, but that's where the similarity ends. That's how it is with oils, they're all similar but the devil is in the details.

    I think that folks should be more interested in how it performs than what it is. After all, if it lubricates better and holds up longer, it shouldn't matter what it is, even if it's tomato sauce.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    144
    i'll like tomato sauce

  48. #48
    Slowly but surely...
    Reputation: fmdj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    208
    I got my sample (Thanks Francis) and have only had the chance to ride it on my commute, which is mostly paved, so take that into consideration. Additionally, it is important to consider that I have only been using dry/wax lubes for the last several years, with White Lightning being one of my faves. The pros so far:
    1. Quite. Really, really quiet. So quiet I could hear other things I need to adjust in my drivetrain (I commute on my F/S MTB right now)
    2. Smooth shifting.
    3. So far, seems to be lasting just fine, which is nice in Nevada's dry and dusty conditions, which are so both on and off-road (remember, my commute is mostly on-road )

    The cons:
    1. Ugh, I forgot how messy it can be to apply a wet lube. The last one I used before switching years ago was TriFlow and they had the handy applicator. Something to ease application might help (though with how thick it is, you may have a hard time getting it through one of those tiny straws)
    2. The smell. I park my bike in my office and sometimes in my house. I didn't mind it in my office, but my wife kicked the bike out of the house saying it stunk. That was a first

    I'll keep riding it and report back after I get some good trail riding in. So far, I'm on the fence. It's certainly better than the Dumonde Tech crap some shop sold me on when they didn't have White Lightening in stock.
    The secret to mountain biking is pretty simple. The slower you go the more likely it is you'll crash.
    - Juli Furtado

  49. #49
    Maromero
    Reputation: doccoraje's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,492
    Quote Originally Posted by fmdj
    2. The smell. I park my bike in my office and sometimes in my house. I didn't mind it in my office, but my wife kicked the bike out of the house saying it stunk. That was a first
    .
    Funny, as I was opening the thread I was receiving my free sample, gracias Francis, I couldn't resist to smell it after your comment, sure it doesn't smell Channel No 5, but it doesn't stink, at least in the bottle, still can't comment on the odor already applied on the chain, anyway we'll see and find out what the wife opinion will be.

  50. #50
    Ride Responsibly
    Reputation: LWright's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,946
    I cleaned and lubed my chain, have not ridden yet, BUT YES IT STINKS! I suspect 90w is the main ingredient cause it smells like 90w. I keep my bike in a back room and the whole room stinks!
    Wouldn't that just blow to find a decent lube but not want it because of the smell?
    Last edited by LWright; 12-04-2008 at 08:10 PM.

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •