Rusty Nails
We remember
- Location
- Living in the slow lane
I don't do either, and still ride.
Why do we accept tubeless, but not waxed chains?
- Thread starter Bio_Carbon
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I don't do either, and still ride.
classic33
Leg End Member
Happy_Days
Senior Member
That’s a very informative clarification of the pros and cons of wax vs oil. Thanks for sharing this.
scotsbikester
Über Member
No it's not. But it is funny, I'll give you that.
Last edited:
Only just seen this thread and was surprised that it is 16 pages long after about a month and still going. I couldn't be arsed to read through the thread so, going from the title, I'll make a little contribution.
I'm not aware that people accept tubeless but not chain waxing - it is not something that strikes me as being intuitive or, on first impression, expected either.
In terms of what I use/do, I haven't accepted either, but I'm not against them per se.
I ride a variety of bikes and, disregarding the folders because that's too much of a speciality to introduce to this, I have 622 rims with tyres ranging from 32mm to 50mm. The bikes are all used on a variety of surfaces. I'm not a racer and none of my bikes are "sporty" but all are suited for being loaded up with luggage. The highest pressures I run are up to about 70psi and I will go down to around 20 psi on the wider tyres. I use tyres with good puncture resistance from mostly Schwalbe and also Vittoria. It is easier for me to count years per puncture than it is punctures per year. Getting a puncture is generally an indicator to me that it is time to consider replacing the tyre.
I am averse to cleaning and maintenance but I like to think that I keep on top of things. My "best" bike has a Gates carbon belt so I certainly don't lubricate that. My other bikes are all chain driven and I do as little as possible to them. If they look a bit dry or rusty, I clean them and lubricate them with oil. If they're really mucky, I clean them and lubricate them with oil. If I think I can get away with it, this involves a spray of WD40/GT85 followed by "mickling", otherwise the chain will be removed, cleaned with water based degreaser or white spirits/meths etc., and the usual methods followed by a lubrication and a "mickling".
I really feel no need to go tubeless - I'm not bothered about any possible performance benefit and I don't have a puncture problem that would benefit from running tubeless. I'm happy with my chain/drivetrain cleaning/lubricating "regime", I check my chain wear regularly and I replace drivetrain components when I see the sort of wear that requires it. My attitude to bike maintenance is similar to my attitude to domestic cleaning - the house is somewhere to be lived in and the bikes are to be ridden. There's a minimum amount of cleaning/maintenance that needs to be done to make both fit for purpose and I'm aiming to make the minimum effort whilst keeping them both fit for purpose and not be embarrassed to have guests in my home or cyclists judge my bikes.
If I've had me and/or guests traipsing through the house, I will hoover, if I've been riding my bike in heavy rain, I will clean it and lubricate it.
I've not got a problem with my chain maintenance regime and it is a lot easier than chain-waxing.
I can appreciate that some people keep a spotless bike (they might keep their home as spotless as a show-home too), that they might like a waxed chain, either because they feel it is cleaner or because they feel it gives better performance (efficiency or drive-train wear). I also can appreciate that some people like to go tubeless - either because it solves a puncture problem that they had or they feel it offers better performance/ facilitates them running lower pressures without the associated risks with tubes.
I don't experience or compute the situation that tubeless is more acceptable than waxed chains.
Neither are for me but I do think they will be for other people (though, on a situation/circumstance basis, I might argue the toss with someone that either are for them).
I'm not aware that people accept tubeless but not chain waxing - it is not something that strikes me as being intuitive or, on first impression, expected either.
In terms of what I use/do, I haven't accepted either, but I'm not against them per se.
I ride a variety of bikes and, disregarding the folders because that's too much of a speciality to introduce to this, I have 622 rims with tyres ranging from 32mm to 50mm. The bikes are all used on a variety of surfaces. I'm not a racer and none of my bikes are "sporty" but all are suited for being loaded up with luggage. The highest pressures I run are up to about 70psi and I will go down to around 20 psi on the wider tyres. I use tyres with good puncture resistance from mostly Schwalbe and also Vittoria. It is easier for me to count years per puncture than it is punctures per year. Getting a puncture is generally an indicator to me that it is time to consider replacing the tyre.
I am averse to cleaning and maintenance but I like to think that I keep on top of things. My "best" bike has a Gates carbon belt so I certainly don't lubricate that. My other bikes are all chain driven and I do as little as possible to them. If they look a bit dry or rusty, I clean them and lubricate them with oil. If they're really mucky, I clean them and lubricate them with oil. If I think I can get away with it, this involves a spray of WD40/GT85 followed by "mickling", otherwise the chain will be removed, cleaned with water based degreaser or white spirits/meths etc., and the usual methods followed by a lubrication and a "mickling".
I really feel no need to go tubeless - I'm not bothered about any possible performance benefit and I don't have a puncture problem that would benefit from running tubeless. I'm happy with my chain/drivetrain cleaning/lubricating "regime", I check my chain wear regularly and I replace drivetrain components when I see the sort of wear that requires it. My attitude to bike maintenance is similar to my attitude to domestic cleaning - the house is somewhere to be lived in and the bikes are to be ridden. There's a minimum amount of cleaning/maintenance that needs to be done to make both fit for purpose and I'm aiming to make the minimum effort whilst keeping them both fit for purpose and not be embarrassed to have guests in my home or cyclists judge my bikes.
If I've had me and/or guests traipsing through the house, I will hoover, if I've been riding my bike in heavy rain, I will clean it and lubricate it.
I've not got a problem with my chain maintenance regime and it is a lot easier than chain-waxing.
I can appreciate that some people keep a spotless bike (they might keep their home as spotless as a show-home too), that they might like a waxed chain, either because they feel it is cleaner or because they feel it gives better performance (efficiency or drive-train wear). I also can appreciate that some people like to go tubeless - either because it solves a puncture problem that they had or they feel it offers better performance/ facilitates them running lower pressures without the associated risks with tubes.
I don't experience or compute the situation that tubeless is more acceptable than waxed chains.
Neither are for me but I do think they will be for other people (though, on a situation/circumstance basis, I might argue the toss with someone that either are for them).
scotsbikester
Über Member
My emphasis. I don't "feel" my chain, or the rest of the drive train, is cleaner. It is unarguably cleaner. Or if anybody somehow "feels" that a chain lubricated with oil is cleaner than a waxed one, then that person has lost touch with reality.
Cleanliness is practically the entire reason that I have changed to waxing. And no, my home is certainly not a spotless "show home". There is no sort of prissy OCD thing going on here, if that is what you are subtly implying. I want to wear ordinary clothes sometimes when I cycle. Or at least ordinary looking ones. I want to be able to cycle to work in ordinary clothes. I want to meet up with friends, or go to the shops, in non-cycling clothes. On the occasions when I have to work on the back end of the bike, I don't want my hands covered in black oily filth. If I walk past the bike, currently living in the dining room of my not-at-all-show-home, I don't want to worry about getting filth, completely indelible filth, on my clothes.
Performance is irrelevant to me, though the extreme quietness of a newly waxed chain is nice. Increased drive train life will be a bonus, but it's too soon to tell if that will happen.
Last edited:
I think you might have misjudged the tone of my post, @scotsbikester (and please excuse me if I'm doing the same to your post).
"Feel" was just a turn of phrase - I haven't looked into waxing so I don't know how clean it compares to a lightly lubricated chain; I could have said "considers" or "judges". When I used to fret over the cleanliness of my drivetrains, after cleaning and lubricating my chain, I could run it through my hand and not have any marks on it, just a little sheen of oil with no apparent colour (though if I tried that before cleaning it, it would have been black but easily washed off) - I don't know how that compares to a waxed chain, or if different wax compounds give different results.
I certainly wasn't implying (subtly or otherwise) any sort of OCD going on (prissy or otherwise) and, tbh, it didn't cross my mind that someone might have taken it or might have thought I meant it that way. Apologies if I came across that way.
"Feel" was just a turn of phrase - I haven't looked into waxing so I don't know how clean it compares to a lightly lubricated chain; I could have said "considers" or "judges". When I used to fret over the cleanliness of my drivetrains, after cleaning and lubricating my chain, I could run it through my hand and not have any marks on it, just a little sheen of oil with no apparent colour (though if I tried that before cleaning it, it would have been black but easily washed off) - I don't know how that compares to a waxed chain, or if different wax compounds give different results.
I certainly wasn't implying (subtly or otherwise) any sort of OCD going on (prissy or otherwise) and, tbh, it didn't cross my mind that someone might have taken it or might have thought I meant it that way. Apologies if I came across that way.
