Has anyone seriously investigated what the optimum chain lubricant is for the C2 chain?

[milansanremo]

When my C2 arrived two weeks ago, my eyes lit up when I saw that it was chain driven.
I consulted and tested chains with major cycling chain manufacturers for several years during the time when they were developing a quick -link system for bicycle chains.
The difference in roller protection and the drag coefficient between various lubricants is enormous. I can't stress this enough after experiencing it first hand.
The first thing that I did was measure the size of the rollers of the C2 chain along with the distance between the outside edge of each roller. With these numbers I will be able to keep track of the exact wear of the chain. Contrary to many opinions, a chain doesn't stretch with wear. The rollers between each link decrease in size over time with force and material contact points deciding the velocity of degradation. The overall length of the chain increases because the rollers become smaller.
I need to pull the hood off to verify my opinion, examining in detail exactly how the drivetrain operates.
As of now, I will be using the Dupont product (wax-based chain saver with Teflon) with the application process specific to the way DuPont reccommends it.

[Sakly]

No idea and I'm using a standard 3 in 1.
My rowErg has 3 years lifetime, 7mm on it and chain looks and feels like new (not measured anything of course). If I need to replace the chain after 10 years and approx 20-25mm, I'm absolutely fine with it

[Joebasscat]

Yep, knock yourself out, but the 3 in 1 recommended by C2 has carried me past 20 mil meters. So there is that.

[JaapvanE]

The old Ergs in my gym hadn't seen a drop of oil in 20 years. Well over 100MM rowed on both, started to make slight noises in their haydays. Given the structural neglect by most gym owners, and the average age of these machines, they obviously can take a serious level of neglect in the oiling department.

PS: just to make sure people do not worry. My personal machine and I celebrate the completion of every 500k with a lavish rub 3-in-1 oil, just as its makers intended....

[milansanremo]

Since the PM5 monitor is capable of capturing wattage, I'm going to assume that there is/are single or multiple strain gauges internally. Since power (wattage) is a simple formula of Force (in Newtons) * velocity (meters per second), perhaps there is another methodology being used.
I would assume that for record attempts multiple new C5 chains have been tested using various types of lubricants observing wattage required for a specific speed.
On the other hand, for this type of counterclockwise drivetrain and assuming some type of freehub technology is being used, reducing the hub resistance could increase the performance with a given wattage.
I look forward to having an inspection of the internals because I can already see that the engineers have created a perfect balance of incredibly low friction in conjunction with an extremely high rpm flywheel... not an easy task!

[Carl Watts]

Are we talking about the C2 Bike or the C2 Rower ?

I still have a bottle of clear lubricant that C2 supply's or did supply with the rower and that works perfectly fine. With a regular lube the chain will last pretty much forever.

The Model C used to come with a D.I.D chain the Model D uses a KMC, the chain size is 25N.

I have since moved to a WattBike and this uses a standard single speed bike chain. The stock KMC one is not so great and the power you can put into a bike and the longer rides that are possible is killing the chain so will be moving to a top end KMC e101 chain designed for Velodrome racing and e-bikes. It costs like four times as much as a standard chain.

I don't think you need to get too technical in trying to find an optimum lubricant, the power savings are going to be minimal. Where the losses get up there is no lube at all like in the gyms and the links literally seize solid.

You used the work "Enormous" to describe the differences in loses but the losses are measured in Watts. Cyclist go to ridiculous lengths and expense to try and save a fraction of a Watt, you can buy crazy derailer gears over here with low friction bearings for NZD$600 each and you need two of them, total waste of money. Different lubricants have shown like a 0.5W difference in a crank bearing, starts to get hard to even measure.

[Ombrax]

Since the PM5 monitor is capable of capturing wattage, I'm going to assume that there is/are single or multiple strain gauges internally.

No strain gauges - all speed and power calculations are based on the motion of the flywheel, not forces measured anywhere on the machine.

[JaapvanE]

Since the PM5 monitor is capable of capturing wattage, I'm going to assume that there is/are single or multiple strain gauges internally. Since power (wattage) is a simple formula of Force (in Newtons) * velocity (meters per second), perhaps there is another methodology being used.

Nope, it measures flywheel speed and acceleration. In the recovery you can calculate the dragfactor. From the average flywheel speed and dragfactor you can calculate power of each stroke (see https://github.com/JaapvanEkris/openrow ... monitor.md for more info). As lead developer of OpenRowingMonitor (an Open Source implementation of the PM5, I see most commercial products. All rowing machines producing decent metrics use this approach.

Your approach is used by exactly one aftermarket product: the SmartRow pulley for WaterRowers. But that is due to the low RPM's and complexity of measuring impellor speed in a watertight vessel.

[milansanremo]

Thank you for providing that information... much appreciated!

[milansanremo]

Thanks Carl
The quality of the machining of the chain had KMC written all over it.
After examining mine, I saw the KMC stamp but mine is a 25F type. My C2 is only a few weeks old so possibly the chain is two generations newer... don't know.

[c2jonw]

To answer the original question, yes, we did extensive testing of the chain and lubrication options in the mid- 1980s when we went from the Model A, which has a 1/2" pitch bicycle chain, to the Model B with the 1/4" pitch chain that is still being used on the current rowers. Accelerated wear tests were carried out comparing resultant chain wear ("stretch") with different lubricants. The 20 weight oil came out on top by a factor of almost 10 to one if I recall correctly. No surprise that for ambient temperatures the 20 weight oil is also what the chain manufacturer recommends.

C2 used to provide a bottle of 20 weight mineral oil with every machine but international shipping restrictions put an end to that so the 3 in One oil has been the recommendation. It's inexpensive and where not available motor oil is a viable substitute. Many bicycle chain lubes are mostly solvents that evaporate a leave little in the way of lubrication.

It should also be pointed out that the Rower chain is different from a bicycle chain in that it does not have rollers so the wear characteristics and possibly the lubrication needs may be different from a bike chain.