Graphite powder is a great industrial dry lubricant and I can understand 2 yrs of R&D would be expensive. But the thought of buying a $150 bottle of pencil shavings seems off putting.

Edit to add: I'm sure they created a optimal point thru R&D, but its make you wonder what a base line of just graphite powder on a chain or graphite powder and some parafin wax would compare.

I was thinking exactly the same: graphene isn't cheap but making your own combo with some paraffin wax would probably remain way less expensive than this thing. However I also realize that I relube my chain every 300kms with Squirt so technically the price difference isn't that huge if you also take into account the lower power losses.

---

Instagram
Youtube Channel
Meta Endurance

Smoke and mirrors.

Claimed gains seem to mostly materialize after 600km, so just re-lube your chain...

$150 for 1-2W seems like an egregious waste of money to me.

Josh at Silca did a video cast last week about chains and one thing that he mentioned (if I recall the facts correctly) that might be why plain graphite may not be best is that the particle size needs to be quite small and consistent to fill the small imperfections in the metal surfaces so that when the two surfaces rub together they are smoothed by the (in this case molybdenum disulfide) small particles filling the imperfections just right. So the smaller the imperfections the smaller the particle and graphite may not lend itself to being this small a particle? but graphene may be something that can be engineered to be small enough? Of course making graphene is no small feat in itself and why it is so expensive.

Graphene and graphite are 2 different things...mostly...graphite MAY contain some graphene. Graphene is a very interesting compound (just look at any peer review journal for the past 5 years and search for graphene). It probably would be cheaper to make it yourself, but then you also have to purchase and handle the stuff. If you do, wear a respirator.

Stephen J

---

I believe my local reality has been violated.
____________________________________________
Happiness = Results / (Expectations)^2

It is actually much easier to make it small than to make it large.....large has been the big hurdle.

Stephen J

---

I believe my local reality has been violated.
____________________________________________
Happiness = Results / (Expectations)^2

Graphite and graphene are VERY similar things. They are literally the same compound. But it is true like how you'd get different properties from a bag of sand compared to a bag of stones.

Though graphites much easier to make into graphene than rocks to sand. Make your own, stick scotch tape to a pencil tip, peel it off and there you have a layer of microns thick graphene. Yes the costs are in getting homogenous graphene in powder form. Also yes, like how you'd nvr want inhale diamond power, the same for graphene.

Yes, Graphene is essentially graphite.

The big problem with all nano and micron materials is dispersion. The particles tend to clump together. Producers have been claiming to have solved this for more than 15 years.

Don't trust a single thing they say without independent evidence. My lab did tests on multiple sources a few years ago. Quality was horrendous and all claims were blatant lies. If you scraped off the gunk from the inside of your oven you'd have as good quality.

https://bikerumor.com/...hene-wax-chain-lube/

They reference the independent testing in this article.

You can buy the little bottle for $15.00.

0.47 of an oz is... not a lot, though.

My favorite part is how your chain looks dirty when it's all dry. Nice.

About that: Adam Kerin of Zero Friction Cycling was one of the parties to the test quoted in that article. On ZFC's Facebook account, Kerin shared that he saw some major issues in the testing data that led him to question the validity of the test. The thing is, he then shared that Absolute Black threatened to sue him unless he took the results down, but that he would follow up later. He seems to now have taken both posts down. And unfortunately, I can't remember the explanation he gave - it was a bit dense, so I figured I'm come back to his page later on, only to find the second message.

Absolute Black did respond to the issue that Kerin raised in the comments on Cyclingnews, saying:

I realize that that response, as well as this comment alluding to the fact that Kerin posted something, are the only hard proof I have. I hope Kerin clarifies his position one way or another.

Yes, Ive read that paper too.
Have you actually made any in quantity and purity yourself? If you have, then I defer to your expertise. If not, then referring to a journal which shows how to make enough to publish a paper about it is not as helpful.

Stephen J

---

I believe my local reality has been violated.
____________________________________________
Happiness = Results / (Expectations)^2

I did the graphite added compound into my crock-pot mix of stuff. Yes, Dan Kennison gave me his recipe for chain lube, and I added graphite powder (same as a locksmith would have). I did not do any watt comparison tests, but I can say that I appreciate my own concoction of lube mix in the heated crock pot.

---

Team Zoot-Texas, and Pickle Juice

I work in the automotive lubrication industry and specialize in friction modifiers. I’ve heard all the claims around graphene as a do-it-all wonder material. I spent around a year and a half working with graphene, both aqueous and oil based dispersions. We were never able to consistently reproduce any literature reports claiming boundary friction reduction with graphene. I would shy away from graphite as well, as the large particles in the contacts often increase friction rather than decrease it. There is a fine balance of treat rate, particle size, and other additives to to get it right, and still there is variation from system to system, chain to chain, chain ring to chain ring.

MoS2 on the the other hand... I have seen first hand make a major impact on friction reduction. Both solid MoS2 nanoparticles and oil soluble Mo complexes like MoDTC. I’ve been trying to get my company to set up a crankset and chain tribometer to test chain lubes, but they’re not interested in the tiny market of us who will pay $$$ for a couple watts :).

Is that a water-emulsified wax, or just normal melted wax stuff?

I've been trying to nail down a recipe for making a water emulsion with paraffin, and am getting closer, but haven't yet quit perfected the Squirt-like consistency. It's surprisingly tricky.

If I nail it down, I'll start playing with additives (though I have no good way of testing efficiency).

FWIW, one of the tricks is to add slack wax to the mix rather than just using fully refined paraffin.

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

If you're comparing it to Ceramic Speed chains, ICE friction chains, or the cost in time and effort to wax your own chains, this lube doesn't sound that expensive to me. OTOH, if it's no better than a bottle of squirt, sure it's crazy.

---

Dimond Bikes Superfan

i had to laugh at "unique black look" - virtually everyone will think your chain is filthy - maybe a tactical ploy?

it sounds like its real benefit is in longevity but how many of us care about that? in ultra long races great but for most purposes re-lubing between rides is a better and cheaper approach as whatever lube you use you will accumulate grime over time.

as for the graphene particles, to my limited understanding they are doing the same thing premier bikes chain has at i suspect a lower total cost - smoothing the irregularities in the metal. i guess that is why it lasts so well as it is permanently addressing those irregularities independent of lubrication.

some interesting things in their graph though:
1. ceramicspeed UFO performance degrades very fast - i suspect ceramicspeed would argue that
2. several lubes get significantly better over quite long distances - makes me wonder if they were not well applied
3. mucoff nano is all over the show - possibly questions the accuracy of the testing?

Good stuff. Great to have some informed comments from a fellow tribology geek. I worked for years in both superhard and soft coatings.

I don't believe a single word any supplier or manufacturer says about any coating or friction modifier unless I test it. Very rare for any claim to stand up.

MoS2 is great in vacuum and adheres reasonably well to steel, but has problems in humidity and aqueous environments., I've found.

Graphene and graphite are NOT the same compound. They are the same element; but not the same compound. Just like graphite is not carbon nanotubes, and even carbon nanotubes are not all built the same, as single wall carbon nanotubes are quite different from double wall carbon nanotubes. They have different properties. I have formulated and made various bioconjugates with all these, as well as used diamond dust, as well as used graphite. They all share carbon as their building block, but the organization into a compound is different and provides them with different physical and electromagnetic properties.

Stephen J

---

I believe my local reality has been violated.
____________________________________________
Happiness = Results / (Expectations)^2

Kerin admitted to a misunderstanding on his part.
https://www.facebook.com/...ts/1504436599761010/

I ordered a small bottle earlier today just out of curiosity. We'll see how it goes. Right now I'm using Squirt, so that'll be all I have to compare it to until I have access to my waxing set up again.

---

Strava

Thanks for the tip. I'd suspected that due to references to multiple waxes by Squirt and others. It's already clear that oils are useful (I've used mineral oil as an additive with a clear improvement), but maybe somehow the oils in slack wax work better.

Interesting graph. It says to me that the Ceramic Speed stuff would be best for me, because I never race for more than 120k. I would just use CS lube on my race chain and keep using the Premier Lube the rest of the time. Dan’s stuff is super inexpensive and works great. Too bad that lube didn’t get tested.

An interesting point is the total wattage reported and how that must vary across test stands. When Friction Facts was producing their own chains, each one came with a measured wattage. My Campy 10-speed chain was 4.35 watts and the low to mid 4 watt range was typical for Dura Ace as well. Given that the wax FF was using at the time was basically the same as what Molten produces, you can see about an extra watt, or about ~20% on the test stand being used for the article.