I wanted to share my experience with waxing my bike chains.
I was resistant to waxing my chains because it seems that a lot of people felt it was "too much work".
But having to constantly clean black shit off my chains after every ride, then spend time degreasing and re-lubing, I figured I'd try waxing when I got my gravel bike.
Now, thousands of KM later and having converted all three bikes to waxed, there's no way I'd go back. The time saved could be measured in hours per month.
First, the biggest complaint is chain prep. Yeah, regardless if you're waxing or not, you'll need to prep a new chain by removing the factory grease. With waxed, you do this once, and no more worrying about degreasing ever again. Make like easy and get Silca's chain stripper, and it's a 10 minute, one-step process.
Ongoing chain maintenance couldn't be easier. After every ride, give the chain a quick wipe (or not). My chain stays clean, even after a 200 km ride.
And if you ride in wet or dirty conditions? Guess what, you're in for a LOT of work if you lube your chain. With waxed, keep a second (or third) chain ready to go, and you just swap it out (10 seconds of effort). Take the dirty chain, give it a wipe if it's only been wet, or pour boiled water onto it if you want to "reset" the chain to bare metal. Then drop it into the waxing pot for a re-wax. You don't have to stand at the pot, so there's no real time commitment here. I've spent more time completely dirtying large microfiber cloths trying to get my chain "clean" when lubed (hint: it's never clean if you use a wet lube, not without solvents and an ultrasonic cleaner).
For actual immersion wax, I do it every 1000 km (sooner than you need to), and use a drip wax every 200 - 250 km to keep things fresh.
Honestly, wax is easier, cleaner, and takes less time to maintain vs wet lube.
The only downsides? The initial cost to get started. But this is offset by not having to replace chains or other components prematurely. You actually save money in the long-term when using waxed chains.
Some might argue that "you can't run waxed chains in muddy or constantly rainy conditions". Well, at the same time, your wet lube isn't really helping matters in those situations, either. Waxed is still better, and you can swap chains much faster than you can clean the grinding paste from a wet lubed chain.
Who would I not recommend waxed chains to? Someone who rarely uses their bike. Drip lube will be "good enough" in those cases. But anyone else would benefit from waxing their chain.
That was extreme, but with wet lube, I used an ultrasonic cleaner + solvents to actually clean it. Less effort than the article, but similar results.
Any other way would not be cleaning much.
The effort, even with ultrasonic + solvents, is more than waxing.
For me, the little effort saves time, money, and headache. It's worth it.
I have a very small box, with a very small slow cooker and a hook to grab the waxed chain. It takes up less space than the solvents needed to clean a web lubed chain.
The time, at least for me, is next to nothing. Far less than constantly wiping a forever dirty web lubed chain + the ultrasonic baths and disposal of solvents.
Page 1 shows cumulative wear (one test after another), but the second page shows individual blocks, and might be more applicable for some riders.
Even in block 1, without any contamination whatsoever, all chains without wax will wear.
In block 2, which would be someone riding only in dry weather, wet lubes show significantly more wear than drip wax, and even more vs. waxed.
In the wet condition block, many of the wet lubes ironically fail past the point of excessive wear, which means you're replacing your cassette by that point.
For me, waxing is a no-brainer, especially considering the other benefits (i.e. no solvents, no dirty hands, quiet drivetrain, etc.).
Let it be dirty. I wet lube, wipe, and let good enough be enough.