Oklahoma red-clay mud. When it rains here, it really rains.
Character. America's muddiest gravel event. Red-clay Oklahoma roads turn into peanut butter in the wet; riders finish unrecognisable under a uniform orange coating. Character-defining weather year-over-year.
Conditions. Early-March Oklahoma: 5–15 °C, 50/50 wet-or-dry odds. In the mud years the clay stops derailleurs completely; in the dry years it's just fast gravel.
If you wax — ZFC-recommended path. Plan around the wet-year scenario: start on a waxed chain, carry Synergetic, accept the chain-stripper reset before the next wax. A dry chain destroys itself in 50 km of red-clay mud, so the oil rescue is non-optional in a wet year. Dry-year: switch to a wax-emulsion top-up plan with SS Drip in the kit.
If you're on oil — pragmatic equivalent. Run a wet-conditions oil regardless of year — apply the night before, carry a bottle, top up at every feed stop. Red-clay mud is uniquely punishing, so plan for a deep post-ride clean either way. Stick with a wet-conditions oil even in a dry year; the dust-mud transitions hit suddenly and a thin oil washes off.
Wax is stiffer at low temperatures; the first revolution of a cold-waxed chain can shed wax before it 'settles'. ZFC documents a longer break-in period and a warm-up spin as the fix.
#1 because: full-wet gravel / MTB / CX riding is scored entirely on Block 4 — wet contamination is the only factor that matters. Cyclowax Race Wax is eligible after scenario filtering and its wear (0.054) is the lowest in the eligible set, which — given your priority weights — edges out every other eligible lube.
#2 because: on Block 4 (wet contamination) this lube's wear is 0.069 vs the top pick's 0.054 — Cyclowax Race Wax pulled ahead on the primary axis. Wear contributed most to this lube's own score.
#3 because: on Block 4 (wet contamination) this lube's wear is 0.108 vs the top pick's 0.054 — Cyclowax Race Wax pulled ahead on the primary axis. Wear contributed most to this lube's own score.
#4 because: on Block 4 (wet contamination) this lube's wear is 0.146 vs the top pick's 0.054 — Cyclowax Race Wax pulled ahead on the primary axis. Wear contributed most to this lube's own score.
#5 because: on Block 4 (wet contamination) this lube's wear is 0.160 vs the top pick's 0.054 — Cyclowax Race Wax pulled ahead on the primary axis. Wear contributed most to this lube's own score.
#6 because: on Block 4 (wet contamination) this lube's wear is 0.160 vs the top pick's 0.054 — Cyclowax Race Wax pulled ahead on the primary axis. Wear contributed most to this lube's own score.
#7 because: on Block 4 (wet contamination) this lube's wear is 0.195 vs the top pick's 0.054 — Cyclowax Race Wax pulled ahead on the primary axis. Wear contributed most to this lube's own score.
#8 because: on Block 4 (wet contamination) this lube's wear is 0.217 vs the top pick's 0.054 — Cyclowax Race Wax pulled ahead on the primary axis. Wear contributed most to this lube's own score.
#9 because: on Block 4 (wet contamination) this lube's wear is 0.231 vs the top pick's 0.054 — Cyclowax Race Wax pulled ahead on the primary axis. Wear contributed most to this lube's own score.
#10 because: on Block 4 (wet contamination) this lube's wear is 0.344 vs the top pick's 0.054 — Cyclowax Race Wax pulled ahead on the primary axis. Low faff contributed most to this lube's own score.