You are trying very hard to find objections, but I don’t understand why. I’ll reply to each, one by one. One more time. 🙂 Easily compared yes, but you don’t do it once in the entire article. Not once do you actually compare the greases on any scientific metric. It’s a half sentence of base properties and then conjecture, absolutely zero knowledgeable comparison done. What’s the typical lithium grease washout when compared to marine grease, when compared to aluminum grease, when compared to polyurea? You have absolutely ZERO numbers to give comparison. thus this ENTIRE article is basically how NLGI and DIN is determined with your unsubstantiated opinion on a list of greases are. That’s it. Soap greases. Soaps are usually made by saponification of fatty acids with hydroxides of various metals – aluminium, calcium,sodium, barium.

As far as I know, those are decent-quality calcium-based greases, that are softer than NLGI2 hardness, not aggressive on plastics, rubber or metal. You have provided NO DATA AT ALL. NLGI2 is fine but is it ‘ideal’ or ‘optimal?’ No, because bicycles don’t need it. Please provide ONE study that shows NLGI2 is necessary for typical bicycle loads as thus far you haven’t provided ANY data so that would be a first.” Serbia is technically in Central Europe, but we’ve had a fair share of “engine revitalization/protection” additives and “super lubes”, “special Russian military lubricants” etc. 🙂 Similar arguments (or “arguments”) as Reason. Complete misunderstanding of the whole post (and subject), trying to find something to criticize. Don’t know why. Why do trolls troll? 🙂 Minimal 4 ball weld test of 1000 N or better was a safe margin recommended by the post’s co-author, an expert on the subject, Stevan Dimitrijević. If you have relevant data that proves otherwise, please share it, I’d be more than happy to link it and correct the data in the post.Same deal with most aluminum based. And again, a 1lb tub of grease will last you 50 years so there’s literally no reason NOT to use it.” For your riding conditions (intended use), that Motul grease looks like a good choice, if the cost is not prohibitive. The research paper provided by Reason as evidence that “aluminium is a better grease at typical bicycle temperatures” actually makes no such claim. The research is into how each soap-type is effected by temperature. It does not purport to compare friction between different greases. In its conclusion the paper makes no claim that the aluminium soap formulation has lower friction: only that friction lowered with heat irrespective of the soap used. Additionally the conclusion is very careful to say the results were derived with respect to a particular base oil, using specified RPM, and specified load. Given that base-oil, RPM, and load all contribute significantly to friction it is unfair to draw the conclusion that grease with Aluminium soaps have lower friction generally. Standard for labelinggrease consistency is established by American non-profit, independent NLGI ( National Lubricating Grease Institute) organization.

Bicycle bearings, whether on wheels, cranks, or fork, are usually ball bearings, i.e. they consist of balls, trapped between two races. These bearings are almost never made to be easily re-lubricated from the outside, without disassembling them, so frequent lubrication would take a lot of time. Since bikes are ridden outside, bearing lubricant needs to keep dirt and water from entering. It should be resistant to being washed off with water, prevent corrosion, while operating temperature ranges from as cold as-20 °Cfor winter use (though some cyclists are even more extreme), to about 100 °Cfor bearings of bikes left in hot summer sun, then ridden.

I never said lithium grease is the best. Optimal, considering both grease characteristics, as well as price, availability and compatibility with other greases – yes. In my opinion and experience. My main “objections” to aluminium and polyurea greases are price and compatibility. Put plainly: for traffic safety, “the best” option is a tank, while an optimal recommendation most people would be well served with is just a plain old Volvo car.” For Shimano NEXUS, unlike “ordinary” cup and cone hubs, I haven’t had the chance to test how they perform with non-factory (non-“original Shimano grease”). Those hubs are expensive and I haven’t had any of my own to first test, before testing on friends’ hubs, and then with customers (like I did with “ordinary” hubs). Safe bet is the “original Shimano NEXUS grease”. It works fine and regularly serviced hubs last for ages. As I’ve tried to explain in this post, bicycle bearings don’t put special requests to grease – as long as they’re regularly cleaned and re-lubricated, they’re golden. Much like soap: doesn’t matter which one is used, as long as it’s used regularly. 🙂 Original Nexus grease works well, and, although more expensive than “automotive grease”, it is still cheaper than XADO products (from the prices I could find). Some (many?), even well renowned, manufacturers don’t state ISO, (n)or DIN standards, but make claims about superiority of their products. Even such greases (of renowned manufacturers) are usually of relatively high quality and do the job they are meant for very well. I prefer to pay less for the same/similar quality AND know exactly what I’m getting for that money. However, it would be unfair to say that the companies you noted don’t make good greases: one wouldn’t do wrong with Phil Wood, Bel-Ray, or Shimano, just to name a few.