replacing a chain - which coating type or make (nickel vs silver vs TI Nitride vs diamond like)? I've been riding a 2017 Giant AnyRoad CoMax for about 2.5 months now and today I checked the chain wear with a Park Tool Chain Wear Indicator:

http://www.parktool.com/product/chain-wear-indicator-CC-3-2

The wear is between 0.5 and .075.  I plan on replacing the chain when it gets to .75, which is probably about a month away, perhaps slightly less.

So, its time to look at ordering a replacement chain.  Upon going to the web page for the bike:

https://www.giant-bicycles.com/us/anyroad-comax

The specification for the chain is "KMC X11", seems simple enough, but upon searching Amazon for "KMC X11":

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&amp;field-keywords=KMC+X11&amp;rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3AKMC+X11

or the KMC page for 11 speed chains:

http://kmcchain.us/chaintype/11-speed/

I find I'm overwhelmed with the options.  They include:

-"DLC" (Diamond Like Coating)

-TI Nitride

-Silver

-"ECO PROTEQ"

-Nickel

Weights seem to include L (light), SL (super light), and XL (extra light).

The most popular choice on Amazon seems to be the "KMC X11.93 Nickel":

https://www.amazon.com/KMC-X11-93-Nickel-Plated-Silver/dp/B00P26H1AO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1480788326&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=kmc+x11+chain

which is also the least expensive by far at $24.  All the others listed above are at least 2x as much, some 3x - 4x as much.

I ride my bike 90+% for commuting, so saving large amounts of weight (ex. carbon vs aluminum frame) is significant, but when getting down to counting grams it doesn't much matter for my riding purposes.

Of course the manufacturer's description of the more expensive chains (i.e. all the options other than Nickel) imply that they are worth the extra cost and provide all-worldly benefits, but I'm skeptical I would notice a difference.

So here are my questions:

-What are the advantages of Silver or TI Nitride over Nickel?

-Is there such a thing as "Diamond Like Coating" or is this just manufacturer hype?

-Would I notice the slight weight difference with the L vs SL vs XL, or is this something that would only matter to a competitive cyclist trying to shave a few seconds off a run?

-Other than the coating, are the more expensive chains actually built more robustly?  Of course the KMC website claims the more expensive chains are more resistant to stretching, but is the difference enough to be significant?

-My inclination is to go with the $24 Nickel chain, is there a compelling reason that the 2x-4x more expense chains would be better for a non-competitive cyclist?

Edit: somebody linked a semi-related post that mentioned Nickel plating, thanks for the suggestion, but that post did not address by other inquiries
In a different order than asked:


Weight: The differences in chain weight are well under your body's weight change during the day (or even a ride). Wanna save weight? Don't eat that bag of chips. It's not going to make a difference in performance.
Platings/Coatings: They're supposed to increase wear resistance and run a bit more smoothly. Not a huge effect, especially if you lubricate your chain properly. More expensive might be a bit shinier or work a bit better. Mostly aesthetic though. 
Price: Going with one of the cheapest compatible options doesn't hurt -- any difference in longevity and durability is far less than the price (and dirt will make the best chain probably die before the worst chain in a respectable manufacturer's line). I generally buy SRAM or KMC though, cause I don't like Shimano's rivet system. Obviously if you run Campagnolo, most of their stuff is not friendly with other manufacturers. 


I generally buy the second/third from the bottom chain in a product line -- you get chrome hardened-ness and sometimes chrome plating with it, so you get a bit less rust in winter.