Zero Friction Cycling

Great to see a legacy brand like Finish Line step into the immersive wax space. They have been at it since 1988, and here they are in 2024 proving they ain't going to act like Kodak or Nokia.

This IM wax sure doesnt look like any other I have seen or tested. Almost all others are dark in colour, this looks more like I just smashed my sand castle up and put in my wax pot.

This is going to be a really interesting test. FL make some bold and very interesting marketing claims around their new Halo product line up, and they are also priced at the premium end of the market, so it is going to need to rock in some Very low wear rates across the rather brutal zfc control test.

Follow zero friction cycling on you tube to stay up to date (I'm pretty slack posting on social media..)

The inaugural RADL GRAVL - huge thanks to all involved in putting on the event, it was mega. Course was so well marked even my garmins best attempts to screw my navigation were put to rest (timely wahoo prize win, i have heard wahoo navigation is rockin. My garmin's - plural - have most certainly not been...), marshals everywhere keeping us safe, when my mega puncture dramas threatened a possible DNF - sram support moto's got me to the finish with some timely co2 top ups. Steak burger and chips after were top notch, and then ha thanks to my mega puncture fun i managed to pick up the bang average prize to make an adventurous day even more epic!

Puncture drama - now this is embarrassing for someone who does know how to ensure his bike is zooming along. but.... its been a busy week, and lets say - i really screwed up. was having a grand ride until about 52km to go.
1) I forgot to check sealant level in my tires pre event, something i ALWAYS do. But i didnt, and rear was dry. So when i got a puncture, there was nada to help.
2) I did not do a pre flight check of my spares pack. I grabbed dynaplug racer number 1, took end off - no plug. Took other end off - no plug. F**k me. Grabbed Dynaplug racer number 2 and took end off - no plug. omg omg omg i forgot to refill after a large mtb puncture awhile back! Final end off - and it had a plug!! but it was not enough to seal
3) After inflating - i was flat again 5km later. Re inflated - repeat. Re inflated switching to a new canister. i was thinking ok.... if i can get enough cannisters, i can make it. But then out of nowhere, the rest of the second canister just released whilst it was in my jersey.
4) I got a new cannister from sram support, but the seal on my inflater was now failed. Thats a new one. so that didnt work. He had an inflater, and i was good for another 5km.
5) then it was slog - it seemed to hold at about 5 ish psi, but that is not amazingly fast. and bumps were a little worryingly rim dingy, and corners a lil squirrely. about 15km of that, then another sram moto gave me a top up, good for 5 more km, then only 10km to go on a very flat back. but i made it!!! Rather slower...

Have stack of cheap chains with the ever pesky sram packing grease.

Have ufo drivetrain clean, and silca chain stripper.

Have bulk blocks of mspeedwax.

The battle of the fancy chain prep cleaners is about to commence.

Both ceramic speed drivetrain clean and silca chain stripper make some impressive claims re how many chains factory grease they can absorb and have your chain prepped perfectly for immersive waxing, wax drip l**e or simply a top drip lubricant.

Let's put that to the test. Starting with a control chain prepped the usual way with turps and alcohol and waxed, it will have intervals run on test machine until 0.1% wear attained, as well as ride test re how dry it sounds and feels per 10hrs test time.

Then will move to 200ml ufo clean and test repeated. And repeated. And repeated. Until it is clear the cleaner is not cleaning off the factory grease, wax bond is poor, gunky etc. Fresh wax will be used for each test to avoid continuation from previous chain. Same to be repeated for silca stripper.

Apologies I barely post on insta / fb anymore as all focus / updates now are on zero friction cycling you tube channel, subscribe there to stay up to date with all things low friction, and for the updates of this test (and I expect over time I will contine to expand this testing to other products depending on lubricant testing).

Hey low friction peeps - sorry it has been a minute since last insta update - pls note that most updates now will be via you tube - i lack the time to update via you tube AND type out a insta / fb post - so if you havent subscribed to zero friction cycling on you tube - get your low friction fingers on that!

Some additional updates (like this one) will still try to pump out a quickie on insta / fb as well - but in the main, allow my dulcet tones to help guide you to your lowest friction life :)

Righto - very excited to announce the launch of Rex Black Diamond Immersive wax - having been conducting testing for rex for well over a year as they kept sending ever improved blends to test until the production version was ready to have a crack at rocking the immersive wax world.

Head to Zero Friction cycling (link in bio) for the full latest news article release / and or head to the product page on website for more deets (or Rex website for launch and pdf download). But in short, if it wasnt all that and a bag of chips - ZFC would not be stocking and recommending. We only add maybe one or two new lubricants a year - the ones that prove themselves the best products found through the worlds most exhaustive and robust independent testing.

Is this the wax for you? head to those spots to find out more.

Latest low friction news – April 5th – Rex Black Diamond wax launch

Hey ho low friction peeps, sorry it has been awhile since an update on insta / fb – most update time recently (and going forwards) will be on you tube – so if you are not subscribed to Zero Friction Cycling on you tube, now is a grand ol time to do so – I will rarely have time to do an update on YT and then type out a separate update for insta / FB – the odd one may be here – but mostly now YT will be the main channel to get your low friction goodness, and my goodness is there a lot of groovy stuff to cover in the up coming vids.

I have a ton of detail reviews for tests completed to get done, which I am failing badly at getting done via normal method of a pretty in depth review document – similarly now the detail reviews to be done will be done on YT, with a link to the video.

New test data for a number of tests should uploaded on the lubricant test page within the next couple of days.

Also last quick bite here – in case you missed it I recently had the honor of being on Dylan Johnson’s you tube channel to talk all things low friction – so check it the chat if you get a chance. Dylan is a top level gravel / endurance racer and training coach, and is always focused on efficiency – he has had some excellent chats with Josh Poertner before, and so it was great for little ZFC to chat about the area’s of focus in my little sphere.
Part 1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGbIqn0Ks_w&t=1438s
Part 2 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uE7CqgRkD8c&t=4s

Alrighty, on to the main theme of todays low friction news, an awesome new immersive wax from Rex – Black Diamond Wax!

I have been testing for Rex for quite awhile now, in fact all up they have had a machine reserved just for them for over 18 months straight.
A big focus over the last year has been testing their immersive wax – many blends and variations were initially tested, up to the point where the tests were VERY impressive, and so then final product blends tested to confirm prior to launch.
What is different re Rex Black Diamond Wax vs Mspeedwax / Silca Hot melt?
In short treatment longevity, and ability to make your own blend.
Over the course of working with REX I have been very impressed with their focus and drive to bring to market an immersive wax option that offers a genuine differentiator in this space.
One key area of focus was treatment longevity – the friction modifier used, and the amount – gives each immersive wax treatment very impressive longevity and protection against wear even when the treatment is running very thin.
The other key differentiator is the ability to adjust your wax blend. Each box contains 11 “Base” wax blocks and one “Friction Modifier” block.

Final tests were done using 11 + 1 training mix, and also a highly concentrated 4 +1 racing / extreme longevity mix – data results are up on the lubricant test page (detail review pending) – but one can see some initial data as well with the attached pics.

If one is mixing more concentrated blend over time they will have a surplus of base blocks, I will be liaising with Rex re whether they will have individual Mod blocks for sale as well in the future. I believe that is happening – but I would like to have that confirmed 100% as it will be desired for a number of rex waxers.

More information can be found on the Product page that will be uploaded to ZFC website - rex wax is now on the online store in low friction goodies and also it has been added as pre prep option to chains, and same in chain & wax bundle packs. Yeehaa.

As always im very excited to announce a new genuinely great very low wear option to the world of cycling - drivetrains are not getting cheaper (have you seen the cost of srams new XX SL cassette and chain!!!!) - if you want more money in your pocket vs abrading through components - you know where to look :)

Low Friction News 62!

Latest media interview;
Huge thanks to Dylan Johnson for having me on his show to chat about how to have a lower friction life on bike – part one of the chat (have you noticed my chats often run long?) just out, subscribe and have notifications on for Dylan’s channel for part 2.

Have a browse of his other vids as well, Dylan has a fantastic YT channel and you can find just stacks of interesting and informative content.

Link below and also will be in media room page on website when get a chance to update there.

(46) This Video Is Not an Ad. Drivetrain Efficiency With Adam Kerin - YouTube

Prestacycle One test update
Well that wear rate escalated quickly…….
After a solid result in clean block 1, showing if you ride basically just very clean road conditions it will be an ok choice, things went rather horrifically once contamination was introduced.

I did a mini update on last weeks you tube vid where checking part way through block 2 – dry contamination block – I estimated it was going to finish the block with approx. 50% wear rate for the block, which is bad.

However my approximation was a fair bit out, as the block continued Prestacycle one just became extremely abrasive by the end – demonstrating high absorbance of contamination and no ability to clear it.
With a wear rate of 95% (basically the entire chains wear allowance) for that block – DO NOT use if you ride offroad unless you want to do flush clean reset post every ride.

The top 5 drip lubricants tested to date average 4.7% wear. That is over 20x lower wear rate than Prestacycle one in this same test block. The lowest wear drip lubricant tested in this block – Effetto Mariposa Flower Power wax – at 2.3% - is 41 times lower wear.

Soooo…….. I feel confident in stating there is a pretty clear gap between the top lubricants tested to date, vs Prestacycle one.

If you would like to wear through your components 20 to 40x faster than proven top lubricants, we now know another great option for you if you want a change from using muc-off or finish line as your cutting fluid.

(scroll next page..)


(*pls note the above is my opinion based the ZFC testing, and for legal reasons I am not stating the above performance as empirical fact. But you know…. It is a controlled test and that wear rate is OUCH.)

There is still a ton of stuff to be dealt with re Prestacycle One’s marketing claims and the very concerning material they have put out re standards testing vs using an actual bicycle chain and drivetrain – that will be dealt with when I can get to the detail review – the short version is – I am EXTREMELY concerned by this companies claims, in my opinion at this time they are knowingly false and deceptive.

I am waiting for the owner to explain how I am incorrect with the above concerns.

The full list of concerns and questions sent to Prestacycle can be found on previous latest news addition found here;
https://zerofrictioncycling.com.au/latest-zero-friction-cycling-news-mega-marketing-concern-spotlight-edition/
Will they be like Muc-Off and just not answer inconvenient questions – or do they genuinely believe what they are saying in complete opposition to my concerns that they are being knowingly false and deceptive.

Time will tell, until they answer me and I can update – based on the concerns re their marketing, and based on the test results – I am have strong sympathetic feelings for anyone who was convinced to use this product. If that is you, perhaps be now convinced to switch to a different option IMMEDIATELY.

World of immersive waxing update
Tons going on here.
 Field testing cyclowax – just the base wax to start with and it feels really nice. Feels just as silky smooth as Mspeedwax or Hot melt – which for a new player in the space is a great achievement. I will try to get a chance to field test their race wax soon ish.
o It can be very easy for immersive waxes to feel and sound very dry very quickly – the wax may be too hard / brittle grade, or too soft. Ie in ZFC opinion (and MANY others) absoluteBlacks graphenwax seems to have a very short lifespan (and tested very high wear). Cyclowax themselves launched with a blend that shed far too much, but has adjusted with what is sold now – so well done re first impressions to CW, the base wax feels great, just starting to feel a bit dry now at almost 300km which is a good mark.

 Silca Hot Wax X field test just started – but right from the gun there was was quite a notable difference in stiffness. This wax is initially VERY stiff running – so if you have a race and are planning to use this super expensive stuff – plan to ensure AT LEAST 30 mins break in (I would aim for 45) – so a nice coffee ride or tune up ergo session the day before using in a race to fully break in and polish the wax will be a good idea. After proper break in, it is so far feeling mint, but a lot more km’s to put onto it yet.

 Hopefully getting closer and closer to Rex releasing their immersive wax which will hopefully be another great option for those who find it is hard to get Mspeedwax / Hot melt in Europe.

o To say ZFC has been extensively testing Rex wax blends for a long time is an understatement, and the final blends tested which should be going to production are really something. Stay tuned for data update shortly

 Mspeedwax continues to dominate the immersive wax sales space as best as ZFC can tell due to combination of exceptional low wear, silky smoothness and price point – and now – awesome packaging in recyclable cardboard. Keeping up with stocks for retail & wholesale has been a challenge, apologies for that – we are slowly getting on top of that now. For a good while it has been like trying to keep stocks of a Playstation 5, but finally production rates are matching customer demand and we are starting to get enough sent down under.

Super quick update on mspeedwax! (mostly). After a bit of a delay, finally the upcoming cases arriving will have the lovely looking new puck format packaged in their also very lovely looking new recycled cardboard tubes - thanks from mspeedwax to all those recently who have put up with pucks arriving in little bubble wrap bags whilst this new packaging came on line!

All we need now is more wax!!! am keeping listed as in stock as cases are arriving / en route - but whoa so are orders - so their may be mini delays of hopefully only a few days from order to shipping to fill mspeedwax / bundle pack orders.

Some chain lines also remain a massive challenge to stock, but we keep pressuring importers. This apparent mega cycling industry downturn is not hitting demand for chains, and 3 years now since covid started it is still extremely difficult to get hold of some chains (like shimano 12spd, eagle x01 / xx1, sometimes shimano 11spd..)

thanks for bearing with - working hard on it as always!

Hope you all enjoying TDU, staying safe, and staying low friction!

Xmas & holidays!
Hey ho low friction peeps - quick update for the upcoming festive period!

But first, as we close on the end of 2022 - I would like to say a huge and heartfelt thanks to all for the support again over this last year. The year has zoomed by and whilst i felt i achieved some progress in war on saving drivetrains from an early death by abrasion - I am ever more aware of how much work i still have to do as ZFC is tiny and the marketing efforts of some juggernauts is huge. But i have some plans afoot to make better progress in 2024 - a little holiday project of mine is to figure out how to do my own quick you tube vid updates vs the film days and longer form videos to cover main info to date - i think if i can get up an running with a weekly / fortnightly little knowledge / spotlight update - much better progress will be made. Stay tuned and thanks for patience so far - again - me being on video - I'm not a natural and that was not the plan when i started, but it is just clearly necessary to make proper progress in an area so riddled with horrendous marketing and general level of knowledge / understanding. Reading pretty much any forum on chain maintenance and lubrication makes my eyes bleed - i need get smarter and make better progress. Plans afoot.

Alrighty - xmas time - I need a bit of rest as im a bit knackered - i will be taking from xmas eve until jan 16th off - aside from my little side project to figure out. I am prepping madly last weeks to try to get as many prepped chains as possible to Andrew - but he will still run out.

Retail supreme leader Andrew will be having the xmas week off, then will fill as many orders and answer as many enquiries as possible. Any enquiries that need me to answer will be filed away for me upon my return, and he will update when he is out of stock needing re supply from me on my return.

The online store will stay open and i think will have a good shot at filling 90%+ of orders during the period im off, with hopefully only about 10% needing me to prep on return / hunt more stock due in.

That will do before i ramble too much - again thanks again for another great year!

Stay safe, stay low friction!!

Mega Marketing Concern Spotlight Edition 2


Prestacycle One – Part 1.

Hey ho everybody – welcome to the second edition of deep dive in to mega marketing concerns in this fun little corner of cycling.
This will be the first of likely just 2 articles covering this product.

The reason this product makes the cut for a deep and fascinating investigation;

 The product performance claims are extraordinary
 In the product information, there is a concerted attack on testing of lubricants via using them on a bicycle chain – which is very odd – testing in ACTUAL use case is generally going to yield most useful results
 Use of industry and milspec testing standards which really have nothing to do with how it may perform on a bicycle chain.
 Concerted attack in general of manufacturers using more realistic (aka – bicycle chain) testing vs using ASTM or Milspec testing as hiding behind something.

As you will see, the bullet point of claims by Prestacycle re their “One” lubricant are beyond extraordinary – they defy in some cases – in my opinion – logic, or physics, or both.

I sent the owner / founder or Prestacycles a bunch of questions to delve into these claims and his thoughts around testing, and I have copied and pasted these questions below.

The owner responded quickly but advised they would need a few weeks to respond to the questions. I have given them a month, and like Muc-Off, I am not going to chase him – he will either respond and be able to substantiate claims, or respond and possibly raise more questions, or not respond at all – that is up to him.

Should he respond, there will a be a part 2 covering their substantiation of the claims, if not – this will be it – use this as an example of some basic questioning processes around manufacturer claims in general.

But just quickly before I put up the claims and my questions to Prestacycle, in case it doesn’t come across clearly in the questions, I would like to make clear why from my / ZFC perspective that use of industry standard – such as ASTM or Milspec testing (or tribology testing) is an issue for claiming high performance in use case on a bicycle chain.

Unfortunately there is no governing industry standard to test bicycle chain lubricant performance in their actual use case – on a bicycle chain. I could type for too long why, and if its ever coming, but just for now, there isn’t one. If there was one, I would be testing to that standard (if it wasn’t a rubbish test).
In lieu of such a standard – what we do have is the likes of FTT / FLT testing for outright efficiency as pioneered by Friction Facts and used by the likes of Ceramic Speed and Silca. We have the very concerning (in my opinion – refer episode 20 on you tube - (657) Episode 20 Muc Off Files – Cycling’s most dishonest Marketing??? - YouTube) testing by muc-off. These tests are quite short duration and are for obtaining outright efficiency loss of the lubricant – generally in clean lab conditions.

Then we have ZFC wear correlation based testing where the lubricant is tested over thousands of km’s on an actual bicycle drivetrain – with dry and wet contamination, and key variables (load, re lubrication intervals, contamination type, amount, when added etc all controlled). At the moment, ZFC testing widely regarded to give the most robust overall performance picture for a lubricant in its actual use case on a bicycle chain.

There are countless industry standard tests – set up to test a lubricant for a very specific industry application. In the huge majority of cases, the test has no bearing whatsoever re its ability to perform on a bicycle chain.

So what if a lubricant shows great lubricating properties at 75 degree’s at 600rpm for 10 minutes on some steel balls at X newton load. If it gathers contamination readily when used outside and becomes very abrasive very quickly – which a lot of industry lubricants re bottled for cycling do – then it will be a poor lubricant for your bicycle chain. That is just one example – again I could type for days on this, even with tests like brugger, pin on disc tests and oh so much more.

In short in ZFC opinion, the absolute opposite to what Prestacycle are claiming is true. All too often a manufacturer may hide behind industry standard testing to back lubricant claims, vs anything to substantiate how it actually performs on a bicycle chain. And to be fair to manufacturers, sometimes that is all they have or been able to go on as getting specific testing like that conducted by ZFC is extremely difficult – I can only test so many lubricants per year, and there is only one of me globally. Im busy.

So whilst I don’t begrudge in many cases manufacturers going to market with industry standard testing to back marketing claims as they may be all they have been able to access, I do feel (strongly) that Prestacycle’s attempts to shoot down application specific testing as inferior to Industry standard testing where the standard has no bearing whatsoever on the application to be a very concerning marketing tactic that may – from the way he words this in the claims – be capable of persuading many readers of something that I feel is really very incorrect. Which is no doubt the aim.

Righto, here we go, get ready for this one;
Prestacycle one lubricant claims;
• Dry L**e
• Wet L**e
• Bike Wash
• Degreaser
• Rust Remover
• Rust Preventer
• Anti-Seize
• Paint Protectant
• Metal Polish
• Leather Conditioner

For the full read of their claims and testing – link to product page here;
https://www.prestacycle.com/product/prestacycle-one-liquid/

Just for fun, here is a little bit about Prestacycle’s grease;
Prestacycle One Creme

• Bearing Grease
• “Wax” (application style) L**e
• Bike Wash
• Degreaser
• Rust Remover
• Rust Preventer
• Anti-Seize
• Paint Protectant
• Metal Polish
• Leather Conditioner

So just in case you thought that it was rather odd for the lubricant to be a dry l**e and wet l**e at the same time, it is good to know the trend continues with them also having a bearing grease that is also a degreaser. One could get into quite the circular situation with that product looking to degrease your bearings by using bearing grease – I’m not sure where one would end up in that case. Holy batman.

Anyhoo, back to the marketing investigation for this lubricant, pls find below the questions sent to Prestacycle, which they have committed to answer – albeit I am awaiting, eagerly.

*********If you have used this product please email me at [email protected] to advise of your experience / and or post experience on FB / Instagram post comments******************

Instructions shown on bottle label state;
1. Clean / Degrease / Polish with One.
2. Wipe off with a clean cloth
3. Rea apply to lubricate
4. For Wet l**e, apply liberally
5. For dry l**e, wipe with a clean cloth.


Question 1
Removing factory grease from a chain usually takes a good bit of solvent / degreaser to clean. Even very concentrated solvents it is expected around 100ml is needed to properly dissolve and remove factory grease.
Let me assume for an initial application in case of One, that a fairly heavy application is applied, let us say 10ml. Chains are normally over 100 links long, but let us round it to 100. This would mean approximately 0.1ml of One per link. A percentage of One must be lubricant, it cannot all be degreaser. Let us say half? So now 0.05ml per link. Pls correct my assumptions, however whatever the figure remains – you confirm this is;
1. Sufficient to remove factory grease lubricant such that the factory grease does not impact the performance of One.
2. It leaves behind lubricant. So it is able to remove other lubricants, but leave its own lubricant behind?
3. Have you tested the performance difference for One on chains that have been stripped cleaned with a more traditional approach of properly degreasing chain with solvent, vs the performance of the chains “degreased” with One to remove factory grease – and if yes can you share the results of this testing?
Question 2
Dry l**e / wet l**e.
If one wants to use One as a dry l**e, all they need to do to achieve this is wipe excess from chain – is not what remains in the chain still wet? Will not this wet lubricant work its way back to the outside of the chain if the lubricant itself does not set to a dry lubricant?

The instructions for most wet lubricants is to wipe excess clean. However, it is not possible for the chain to remain dry on the outside if the lubricant applied is a wet lubricant. An amount of lubricant always moves back out, making the chain externally wet. I have tested so many wet lubricants – control and real life, and always thoroughly wiped excess, and all of them are again wet on the outside after the next ride.
Are you claiming / confirming this is not the case with ONE, and that if excess is removed, the outside remains dry after riding?

Question 3
Metal polish. By what mechanism is a polishing action achieved?
By its very nature – to polish metal – i.e to smoothen out peaks and troughs by removing surface roughness – this is removing metal. This takes abrasive friction. If one sets to polishing metal with a frictionless cloth – nothing happens. A polishing agent may be mildly aggressive for initial stages, then much less so to achieve a very smooth surface. But less abrasive, thus less friction, is not lowest friction.
It is EXTREMELY rare for a lubricant to also try to act as a polish, unless the outright low friction performance of that lubricant is not the aim, the polishing is the aim.
I will be moving to later, however I note the claims of One being so low friction it “Broke” the ASTM test standard you used.
This apparent extremely low friction does not match the characteristics needed for One to also be able to polish, as there would not be sufficient friction to affect any physical surface change to the metal.

Can you pls clarify how One can be extremely low friction, and a metal polish?

Question 4
The overall variety of claims for One is, frankly – concerning. Ie Rust remover, leather conditioner, bike wash, paint protectant.
Usually when ANYTHING tries to be many things, there are compromises vs a product that specialises in being outstanding at one thing. In this case that one thing is bicycle chain lubricant.
I cannot grab a bottle of another proven top lubricant, let us say UFO drip, or Silca Synergetic, or Rex black diamond, and use those products to degrease the factory grease off my chain, lubricate my chain as an extremely low friction lubricant, wash my bike with it, apply it to the bike after this to then to protect the paint on my next gravel ride, polish the silver cutlery at home, then condition my leather couch.

It is akin to me looking for a bike that will be able to be highest level performance bike for my next Time Trial event, followed by a gravity enduro event, then a criterium race, then a cyclocross race etc. To have one bike able to be actually ridden in all of the above events, there would be some compromises to that bikes performance in each event category.

Can you confirm that a) you absolutely stand by all of the claims for Prestacycle one, and that it is a high performing product in ALL category claims listed, and b) can you provide information to substantiate these claims, as frankly, the claims are extraordinary – I have not seen its like, really for any product in anything I can recall in my life.


Moving to Testing
Test Question 1
“Tests performed using chains are flawed because chains are already lubricated with something else during manufacture and cleaning is never absolute”

Would it not be crucial to assess how One performs on a bicycle chain since that is going to be where it needs to perform?

Tests using bicycle chains (as performed by myself) are assessing the lubricants in their actual use case. On bicycle chain, on a bicycle drivetrain. If a chain cannot be perfectly cleaned for the lubricant, that is the starting conditions for all lubricants that then need to be able to perform in those conditions.

Considering the recommended degreasing in the case of One is to use one to degrease the chain, I would say that One has a definite use case of previous lubricant being present that may affect how One performs.

Surely – as previous lubricant present, and on a bicycle chain being its actual use case – testing the actual use case would in fact be extremely relevant (as in, THE most relevant testing) as opposed to flawed?

That statement is to me completely at odds with itself, and logic. Can you explain your position such that I understand how it avoids being completely at odds with itself.

Test Question 2

“Making claims they don’t believe in Standards testing is just a way of hiding from the fact that they won’t like the results”

I have raised concerns myself with numerous manufacturers using just tribology or standards testing, as often these tests do not realistically replicate the conditions the lubricant needs to meet at all. Many lubricants that have extremely good results in X tribology test or Y standards test, have shown to deliver poor wear rate results in its actual use case – on a bicycle chain on a bicycle.

There are so many standards to choose from, that manufacturers can choose a standard that most suits their lubricant, even if that test standard is far removed from what the lubricants actual use case. There have definitely been cases of a particular test standard being chosen that shows one lubricant to perform brilliantly, and a competitor to perform poorly. Ie, a pin on disc test where a liquid lubricant can retain a lubricating film for a longer time vs a paraffin wax base solid lubricant where the pin will scrape the wax off the surface. That is hardly an applicable test to use to assess lubricants for use on a bicycle chain, yet that has been done.

Also, with many cycling lubricants on the market being just a re branded and re bottled lubricant from another industry manufacturer, they can simply use the ASTM or tribology test that was conducted to certify that lubricant as a good choice for that industry application. That standard often bears no indication at all as to whether or not the lubricant will be a good lubricant on a bicycle chain, being ridden outside completely exposed to the elements.

As such, I find that a manufacturer is much more likely to hide behind an ASTM test standard that has little to do with how it will perform in its use case on a bicycle chain, as opposed to hiding behind something else to say they don’t believe in standards testing.

I might believe in standards testing for bicycle chain lubricants, if there was an ASTM standard for testing bicycle chain lubricants. There is not one, so why are test standards developed for different industry applications superior to testing bicycle chain lubricants in their actual use case?


Test Question 3
“We openly post our ASTM lubrication results which chart our extremely low resistance and “broke the test” results proving our product will not fail even under the most extreme circumstances”

I cannot find this. Where is the link to this ASTM test standard?
I have been able to look up the Falex 4 ball test, it is this one yes?
https://www.kelid1.ir/FilesUp/ASTM_STANDARS_971222/D5183.PDF

Can you provide more information that your lubricant “Broke the test”, and what do you define as breaking the test?
To me, and I think to a lot of readers, breaking the test means that the result was so exceptional the test applied was insufficient to properly assess the full performance potential.

Ie, if I was looking conduct V02 max testing, but my test machine maxed out at 250w resistance – that test would have no problems assessing my Mum’s v02 max, but if I was to test Filipo Ganna, then yep, he would for sure break the test.

In the report on your website, we can simply see, that for the test - the report result is No fail.
Reaching the end of the test with no fail – is that what you are claiming as “breaking the test” – or is this simply passing the test?

What about a harder ASTM test? We know that many lubricants will in no way struggle to pass the same standard test you used for One.

Honestly, such testing is typically – what standard is needed for the lubricant to assess its performance in its use case. A no fail is typically passing what the lubricant needed to pass to be cleared for use. If a higher level of assessment is needed, a harder test standard is chosen – especially if the manufacturer wishes / needs to know where the lubricants limit is.

I feel that claiming passing a standard with no fail as “Breaking the test” is extremely disingenuous and misleading.

If I was to pose the question to Polaris Laboratories re One “Breaking the test” by simply achieving a No fail in that standard – what answer do you expect I would receive?

May I state also that the temperature and speed of that test is quite far removed from the expected operating environment use case in a bicycle chain – leading back to points raised in Test questions 2.

Test Question 4

This statement here;
All of these certifications are irrefutably just as applicable to Bicycles as they are to every other piece of machinery in the world.

I believe that is just manifestly, and obviously not true. If this was the case, there would just be a single ASTM test standard. Pass that, and alrighty this lubricant is applicable to be used in every machine in the world from a bicycle chain to a jet turbine main thrust bearing.

The fact there are countless standards, so that industry can ensure the lubricant they need passes a test standard that is directly applicable to the use case needed, completely rules that sentence as to be – extremely obviously – incorrect.

Can you please comment on this?

Test Question 5

Can you please provide the test standards for the “Milspec” testing that One has also been subject too, and how they relate to the performance of One for use on a bicycle chain?
1. MIL-PRF-6340E ASTM D93 Flash Point
2. MIL-PRF-6340E ASTM D445 Kinematic Viscosity 104 F
3. MIL-PRF-6340E ASTM D4172 Wear Preventative Characteristics
4. MIL-PRF-6340E ASTM D5620 Load Carrying Capacity Jaw Load
5. MIL-PRF-6340E ASTM Corrosion Production


**Note - this investigation into Prestacycle one by Zero Friction Cycling will be public – again a key focus of ZFC is assessing manufacturer claims. This enquiry sent to you, and your responses – will be published on the zero friction cycling website.

I am happy to discuss via zoom or similar if you wish, however I would like the responses to the above in writing first so that I have your input to consider for the conversation as that will greatly help with any clarifications during that discussion.

I know that was a bunch of reading and lot of questions – and everyone is busy so I understand you can’t just quickly smash back a full response to this email. If you can however advise a date when you will be able to respond to the questions raised that will be greatly appreciated.

I have also purchased some One to test in the ZFC control test, and I will advise you of the results and look to obtain your input on the results before I review the product.

**Addendum – sorry almost forgot, re Prestacycling Crème – can you please advise how it is a grease, and a degreaser – in the same product? One could get into quite a circular situation there applying more grease to degrease their chain?